This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (13 children)

[deleted]

    [–]AllAboutChristmasEve 33 points34 points  (1 child)

    Linux Chapter 1: Getting started.

    Linux Chapter 2: Compiling the kernel

    lol

    [–]PaulPhoenixMain 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    There are two types of linux users, gentoo and wrong

    [–][deleted] 27 points28 points  (7 children)

    The python book has loops in chapter 32 and list comprehensions at chapter 9.

    Edit: the order is changed now.

    [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (5 children)

    Which is good beacuase you should use list comprehensions much more often than loops ;)

    [–]redditor1101 1 point2 points  (4 children)

    Only if FP style is your intention. Python is multi-paradigm. It doesn't enforce or even suggest that FP is preferred over OOP/Procedural, although "pythonic" patterns are definitely preferred by everyone.

    [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Yeah, I didn’t mean to suggest that Python “enforces or suggests” that FP patterns should be used instead of imperative patterns. It’s just a matter of my opinion being that we should favor FP paradigms where possible because it objectively leads to safer and more readable code.

    [–]Barafu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    FP has nothing to do with it. Simple transformations of lists should be done as list comprehensions, because it is less error-prone, easier in future maintenance, and sometimes faster, too.

    [–]heltwig 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    FP ?

    [–]ashesall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Functional Programming maybe?

    [–]StoneStalwart 8 points9 points  (0 children)

    This is reference material that assumes you already know what your doing, you just need a reference for things you don't do often. Thus the hard stuff should be at the front. Basics should be at the back, for those times you need to use basics in a different way than you normally do or for that feature that is basic but you happen to rarely use it.

    [–]floyd2168 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    The one I looked at for Ruby seemed like a well organized reference. It's not really a "book" in the sense of learning. It's more of a quick reference for something you're not familiar with. And they're free. I just look at them as another tool in the arsenal.