Title: A response from the author
Product review: M. J. Graham correctly points out that the definition of postcondition is incorrect. This has been addressed. She also correctly notes that something is wrong with Figure 1-17; there was a problem in showing the box around PostingRule as a dashed outline, and I'm not sure why this was not corrected. However, I fail to see how these add up to 'so many glaring errors,' and I suggest that Ms. Graham forward notice of other errors she finds to APress for future correction.Mr. Ng, on the other hand, makes an assertion that is clearly false. The differences between the notations in Figure 1-13 are explained on the previous page; if he wishes to see an expression of which notation is 'better,' he'll have to find a different book. In the meantime, remarks such as 'sometimes you read it with lots of ambiguities come into your mind' is less than useful. With regard to the comment about how 'bad' it was written, I'll just say that at least I know proper grammar.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
