News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Algorithms by Jeff Erickson by mhh__ on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @07:50AM (#26076867)
Poor logic. I don't have add tests to my code, after all they're free not to merge, but I should.

Exercises with no solutions are very hard for people learning away from traditional academia - I haven't read this book so I don't know what they're like, but in a physics books it's often common to add questions that take fairly deep conceptual understanding which if you don't click with the book means you're totally out of action until you find somewhere else to learn from.

Re:Algorithms by Jeff Erickson by comeonseriously on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @07:53AM (#26076894)
Again, you don't have to use this book. There are hundreds of books on algorithms, many of which have solutions for people who need them. Getting all pissy with the author because he doesn't provide them is sad and not neccessary.
Re:Algorithms by Jeff Erickson by sohdas on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @08:27AM (#26077173)
I don't know, I think he made a very fair critique. Sure, there are hundreds of algorithms textbooks. But there are hundreds of anything. Anyone can make anything they want to, and they are subject to criticism for that.
Re:Algorithms by Jeff Erickson by dominotw on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @08:56AM (#26077446)
"right thing to do" is not a fair critique.
Re:Algorithms by Jeff Erickson by pm90 on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @10:18AM (#26078428)
> Getting all pissy with the author because he doesn't provide them is sad and not neccessary.

The only person who seems to be getting “pissy” is you.

What is the point of making a comment like “if you don’t like it, leave?”. People who say this seem to think they’re some pithy genius but it’s not a comment that advances the conversation at all.

“Hey I have some feedback ...”

“I don’t accept feedback. Take it or leave it”

“Ok”

That’s not really what HN is meant for.

Re:Algorithms by Jeff Erickson by comeonseriously on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @07:21PM (#26096678)
> People who say this seem to think they’re some pithy genius but it’s not a comment that advances the conversation at all.

Does the conversation really need to be advanced? The author has chosen to not include answers and gave an extremely valid reason for choosing not to and HN'ers are, indeed, getting pissy saying the author should do the "right thing" and provide the answers.

No. Just no. The "right thing" is to accept that the author is choosing not to and move on if you need answers. The author doesn't owe anyone answers.

Re:Algorithms by Jeff Erickson by pm90 on Wednesday February 10, 2021 @09:23PM (#26097516)
Nobody in this chain mentioned anything about making the author change his decision.

The discussion is about whether his decision may be criticized. Which it absolutely can be.

Again, saying, “if you don’t like it, leave” is not the genius rejoinder you seem to think it is. It doesn’t add anything to the discussion.

I could flip this back at you and say “if you don’t like this discussion, leave”. I’m not doing that because I choose to engage in a good faith discourse.