What's a good textbook?

[Peter J. Holsberg]

In article <1429 at sugar.UUCP> peter at sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes:
|In article <140 at mccc.UUCP>, pjh at mccc.UUCP (Peter J. Holsberg) writes:
|> and lacking in both examples and explanations.  A person learning C from
|> K&R would have to spend many hours testing and playing to understand their
|> examples.
|
|Anyone who learns a language without spending hours testing and playing with
|it is a much better programmer than those of us who learned 'C' from K&R.
|Or else they didn't really learn it...
|-- 
|-- Peter da Silva  `-_-'  ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter
|-- Disclaimer: These U aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.

Oops!  I sure didn't express myself very well on that one!  I agree
completely that one doesn't really *learn* a language until one has done
much on-line playing with examples.  What I meant was that a text book
can be written so that it includes many good examples, each of which i
sexplained thoroughly.  See, for example, any of the "dissection" books
by Kelley and Pohl.  Having dissected examples gives the non-genius
student direction in his/her exploration on the computer.
.

-- 
Peter Holsberg                  UUCP: {rutgers!}princeton!mccc!pjh
Technology Division             CompuServe: 70240,334
Mercer College                  GEnie: PJHOLSBERG
Trenton, NJ 08690               Voice: 1-609-586-4800