As someone lacking a solid scientific background, reliance on math was much more of an issue. I managed to get through Chapter 1 very slowly because I had to learn math concepts to understand what the code was about (Khan Academy helped a lot). Some sections took me up to 3 days to complete ! The beginning of Chapter 2 which is about data manipulation was actually much easier for me. Then I got to the section on the picture language which I found boring and I was also having less time to devote to my study, so I've given up at that point. But I'm really glad I made it so far. What I've learned so far is very precious and one day I'll carry on with the rest of the book !

Compared to the math, Lisp was a non-issue. I didn't even notice I was learning it. But I'm a "practical" coder lacking formal training, not a science student learning to code.

Skip the picture language section. Better to go through the book skipping a few parts then to stop because you can't do every single exercise the first time through! I just started chapter 4, and judicious skipping has thus far been the right choice. If the options are "skip a little and gain the value of the rest" or "try do it all, but get stuck and quit" choose pragmatism!

Also, a trick I like to do with the exercises is struggle with one for 20 minutes or so, and if I am not making progress, look up the answer. Usually that helps me understand what I was missing enough to then do it myself. That happens maybe 1/5th of the time, and usually because the question was vague or oddly worded, or most commonly, I didn't know how to test that it was correct.

And yet Sussman and Abelson themselves were behind the switch from Scheme to Python at MIT. I don't hold them out as infallible, even about their own course, but it should give us pause, yes?

They have a lot of data, we have ... opinions. And the data was saying that students were having trouble learning to do practical engineering problems after this course. So, 2 hours or not (and I say not), the reality is that really bright students had trouble with it, and their professors and designer of the course, co-inventor of the language, and author of SICP thought Python a better choice than Scheme for this course.

Empiricism trumps all.

> Why would reliance on Lisp be an issue? It's a basic requirement. Lisp can be learned in 2 hours. If you can't spend 2 hours learning some basic rules, you have no business dabbling in computing.

Yeah right, first you dont know me you are assuming I dont know LISP while i have GCL opened on my computer right now. Second, your kind is the problem, computer science has nothing to do with being able to learn LISP in 2 hours or not.that's good if you did. You must be the smartest computer science guy in the world.

I dont know you, but your message makes me say you are arrogant and bigheaded and i'm not interested in people like you. I'm interested in making knowledge accessible, even for those who "cant learn lisp is 2 hours therefor they have no business dabbling in computing".

You may be smart but i pity your coworkers that need to endure your arrogance.

For such a relatively innocuous and general comment, you're taking this very personally.

Well at least i'm sure this mahmud guy has better things to do than trolling me on HN now.

I did not come here for a fight just to suggest an alternative version of SICP.

I just dont like trolls and I responded appropriately.

You read way too much into my comment. I wasn't trolling.

My position is that if you're involved in computing in any capacity, you will have to learn countless formalisms and languages. And S-expressions are on the more accessible end of the spectrum.

If you and I learned it, so can others. Exclusively seeking out C-like syntaxes will only hinder you, professionally.

P.S. SICP introduces all the Lisp you will need as it goes. Really.

> You read way too much into my comment. I wasn't trolling.

yes you are trolling,now go back to wherever you come from,because you're not contributing to any constructive discussion.

I'm going to support mahmud here, and suggest that your behavior is the least constructive in this particular sub-thread. He's absolutely right that Lisp is simple and the basic rules can be picked up in an hour or two. He's also right that over the course of a career in computing, you'll have to pick up countless formalisms and languages. Additionally, SICP is not for the faint of heart. It is not an easy text, and the use of Lisp is fairly central to its main point. This is not to say that computing shouldn't be accessible. It definitely should be. That being said, SICP covers intrinsically "difficult" material. There's no substitute for an iota of determination here. If you don't have the determination (not intelligence) to be bothered to learn Lisp, you're not going to be able to complete SICP. It's not going to happen.

Please do not address another user this way on Hacker News.