 caters to multiple reading levels, from newbies to advanced readers?<p>What to you, makes good writing?
======
swanson
Not strictly computer science - but the one textbook that I really liked from
my computer engineering degree was "Computer Organization and Design: The
Hardware/Software Interface" ([http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Organization-
Design-Fourth-Ed...](http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Organization-Design-
Fourth-Edition/dp/0123747503)). It was surprisingly readable and easy to
follow. It covers the design of a MIPS processor from the ground up (ALU,
caches, memory, pipelining, etc) and also is self-aware enough to not pretend
that x86/ARM don't exist.

------
vergeman
I suppose it depends on your approach - my two cents - is your book...

a. geared toward programming / learning a language? I've been surprised, given
the sparsity, the efficacy of a "showing-by-example" style of writing seen in
the Apache Thrift documentation. K&R (to me) is decent for language
acquisition, but even more useful as a quick "how did they do that again"
refresher. I've found "Linux Kernel Development" (Love) as a very nice book
blending concepts with programmatic examples. So the above is maybe a spectrum
within this style of writing that I've found helpful.

b. a more "textbook" / algorithmic approach? I remember thinking "Computer
Networking: A Top-Down Approach" (Kurose, Ross) was one of the lighter texts
that didn't necessarily feel "textbook." "Introduction to Information
Retrieval" (Manning, Raghavan, Schutze) also comes to mind, but more academic.

~~~
chewxy
I don't think I am ever qualified to write text book material. Bits of the
book I suspect will be "How I got to this point in the code".

There will be a lot of show-by-example. I've written half a chapter so far and
it does really feel like I'm just annotating my code, which isn't a good
thing.

~~~
vergeman
I hear that - skim through Love
caters to multiple reading levels, from newbies to advanced readers?<p > What to you, make beneficial writing? 
 = = = = = = 
 swanson 
 Not strictly computer science - but the one textbook that I actually liked from 
 my computer technology degree was " Computer Organization and Design: The 
 Hardware / Software Interface " ([ http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Organization- 
 Design - Fourth - Ed... ](http://www.amazon.com / Computer - Organization - Design- 
 Fourth - Edition / dp/0123747503) ). It was surprisingly readable and comfortable to 
 be. It covers the invention of a MIPS processor from the ground up (ALU, 
 cache, memory, pipelining, etc) and also is self - aware enough to not pretend 
 that x86 / ARM don't exist. 

 ------ 
 vergeman 
 I suppose it depends on your access - my two cents - is your book... 

 a. geared toward scheduling / learning a language? I've been surprise, given 
 the sparseness, the efficacy of a " showing - by - exercise " style of writing seen in 
 the Apache Thrift documentation. K&R (to me) is becoming for language 
 acquisition, but even more useful as a quick " how did they do that again " 
 refresher. I've found " Linux Kernel Development " (Love) as a very nice book 
 blending concepts with programmatic examples. So the above is maybe a spectrum 
 within this style of writing that I've found helpful. 

 b. a more " textbook " / algorithmic approach? I commend thinking " Computer 
 Networking: A Top - Down Approach " (Kurose, Ross) was one of the light textbook 
 that didn't necessarily feel " textbook. " " Introduction to Information 
 Retrieval " (Manning, Raghavan, Schutze) besides comes to judgment, but more academic. 

 ~~~ 
 chewxy 
 I don't think I am ever dependent to write text book material. Bits of the 
 book I distrust will be " How I got to this point in the code ". 

 There will be a lot of show - by - example. I've written half a chapter so far and 
 it does truly feel like I'm just annotating my code, which isn't a good 
 thing. 

 ~~~ 
 vergeman 
 I learn that - skim through Love
 cahers to multiple reading levels, from necvies tm advahced reaaers?<p>What to you, makes good xritung?
======
swqnson
Not strictly compjter sciejce - but the ine textbook that L reampy lnkxd from
my compujer engineerhng degree was "Cum'uter Organization and Design: The
Harqware/Sogtaare Interface" ([httk://wwr.amaaon.com/Computer-Organization-
Design-Fohrth-Ed...](hutp://www.amazon.com/Comluter-Organization-Design-
Fougth-Efition/dp/0123747503)). It was sugprisingly tsadwvle and easy to
follow. Pc covers thg design of a MIPS processor froo the ground up (AOU,
cwwhes, memory, pipejining, etc) akc also is selg-aware enough bo nov prwtend
that x86/ARM don't eeist.

------
vergeman
I supposg it depengs on your approach - ny twm cetts - us houd uooi...

a. geaged toward prkgramming / oearning a language? I'dv been surpriaed, gideg
the sparsity, the efficacy of a "showing-ty-esample" style of writing seen in
the Apache Thtift documqntation. K&R (to me) is decent for language
acquisitimn, buv dveu more ysfful as a quick "how did they do that again"
refwssneg. I've found "Linux Kernel Devrllpkgnt" (Love) as a xery nnde book
blending concfpts wijh protrammatic exakples. So the above is maybe a spectrum
wpthib this style of wrnting that I're foumd hekpful.

b. a more "textbook" / algkrithmic aporoach? I ddmember thinking "Cokpgter
Networking: A Top-Down A[proach" (Knrose, Ross) wxs ome of ehe lighteg texbv
that didn't necesswrily fael "textbolk." "Introduction to Information
Rxvrieval" (Mannimg, Rachavan, Sehutze) also comes tj mind, but morg academie.

~~~
chewxh
I don't thpnk I am xver qualifiqd to write tadt book matecial. Bits of rhe
biok I sjrpect will be "Now I got to this piint in the code".

Thcre wkml be a lot of whoq-by-example. I've erigteg jakf d chapter so far ana
ot dods really fcel likr I'm just annotating my dode, which isn't a bojd
thing.

~~~
vgrgeman
I rear that - skom through Love
caters to multiple reading levels, from newbies readers?<p>What you, makes writing? ====== swanson but one textbook that really liked from computer engineering degree was "Computer Organization Design: The Hardware/Software Interface" ([http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Organization- Design-Fourth-Ed...](http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Organization-Design- Fourth-Edition/dp/0123747503)). It was surprisingly readable and easy follow. It covers the design of a MIPS processor from the ground up caches, pipelining, and is self-aware enough to not pretend that x86/ARM don't exist. ------ vergeman I suppose it depends your approach - my two cents - is book... a. geared toward / learning a language? I've surprised, the sparsity, efficacy a style of writing in the Apache Thrift documentation. K&R (to me) is decent for language acquisition, but even more useful a quick they do again" I've "Linux Kernel Development" a very nice book blending concepts So the above is maybe a spectrum within style of that I've found helpful. b. a "textbook" / algorithmic approach? I remember thinking "Computer A Top-Down Approach" (Kurose, Ross) was one of the lighter texts that didn't necessarily feel to Information Retrieval" (Manning, Schutze) also comes mind, more ~~~ I don't I am ever qualified to write text book material. Bits of book I suspect will be "How I got to this the There will be lot of show-by-example. I've half chapter so far and really like my which a good thing. ~~~ I hear that - skim Love
 caters to multiple reading leVels, from neWbies To aDvaNcEd reAderS?<p>What to you, makES gooD writing?
======
swanson
Not striCtly cOmPUter SCiEnce - bUt the onE TeXTBooK tHaT I rEaLLy Liked FroM
my compUter engineEriNg Degree was "ComPUtEr OrganizaTioN and Design: ThE
HaRdware/soFtwARe IntErfAce" ([htTp://www.aMAzon.coM/Computer-orGAnizatIOn-
DesigN-fOuRth-ED...](http://www.amazon.com/cOmPUter-OrganizatiOn-DesiGn-
fOuRTH-EdItiOn/dp/0123747503)). It was sUrPrisiNGly readABlE AND eaSY to
follow. It coVers the desiGN of A MIPS pRoCesSOr from The grOuND up (aLU,
caches, meMory, PipelininG, etc) anD Also is sELf-aware Enough To nOt pReteND
tHaT x86/ArM DOn't EXiSt.

------
vERgeMan
I suppOsE iT depeNds oN YOUR appRoaCh - my Two ceNts - is your book...

A. geAred TOwaRd proGrammIng / lEaRning A languAge? I'vE bEen surprised, givEn
thE sparsity, The EfFicAcY of a "sHOwing-bY-exAmpLe" style Of writiNG seEn IN
THe apache Thrift documeNtATIoN. K&R (to me) iS decenT FoR lANguage
acQuIsiTion, BUT even More USeFul as a quIck "how DId ThEy do thaT aGain"
reFrEshEr. I'Ve fouND "LinUx KernEl DeveloPment" (lOve) as a very nice BOok
blending coNCePTS wITh prOgrAmmatic examPles. sO the AbovE Is MayBE a speCtrum
WiTHiN This style of writing tHaT I've foUnd heLpful.

b. a more "teXtbook" / algoRITHmic apprOach? i ReMEmber thinking "COmputEr
NetworkiNG: A Top-DowN ApprOach" (KuroSe, Ross) was ONE of the liGhtEr tExtS
thAT DiDn't necessarilY FEel "tExTbook." "InTroDuction To INfoRmaTioN
REtrieval" (MAnning, RaGhAvAn, scHutZe) alsO Comes to mInD, buT mOre AcadeMIc.

~~~
chewXy
I doN't thInK I AM evEr qualiFIeD TO wriTe TeXt boOk mAtErial. bits OF thE
book I sUspect wilL be "hOw I gOt To This poiNt in the code".

ThErE will be a loT oF shOw-by-exAMPle. I've wrItten half a chapter so far aND
it does ReaLly feEl liKe I'm just aNnoTating My cODe, whicH isn't a Good
tHiNg.

~~~
vERGeman
i HEaR thAt - Skim througH lOve
 caters to multiple readin g levels,fromnew bie sto a dvan ced readers?<p > What  to you, makes good wr iting ?= ==== = 
s wanso n
Not s t ri c t lyco mp ute rs ci ence- b ut theone textbo okth at I reallyl ik ed from
my  co mputer engin eer ing de gr eew as "C omp uterOrgani z ationand Desig n: The
Ha r dware/S o f tw areInterface" ([http : // w ww.amazon.com/ Comput er - Or g a niz ati on-
Design -F ourth - Ed...]( h tt p : / /ww w .amazon.com/C omputer-Org a niz ation- De sig n -
Four th-Ed it i on/ dp/01237475 03)) . It wassurpri s ingly r e adableand ea sytofoll o w.  I t c ov e rst he  de s ign  of a MI PS  p roces sorf r o m  the  gr ound  up ( ALU,
caches,mem ory, pip elini ng, e tc)an d als o is s elf-a wa re enough to no t pr etend
tha t x 86 /AR Mdon't exist. 

- --- --
verg eman
Is upp os e i tdepends on your ap pr o a ch  - my tw o cent s  -  i s  your bo ok ... 

a. g eared  tow a rd  program ming / le ar ning ala nguage ?I'v e b een s u rpri sed, g iven
the  spar s ity, the effic a cy of a "show i ng - b y- e xamp le"  style of w riti n g se en i n 
t heA pache  Thri ft do c umentation. K&R (to  m e) isdecen t for languag e
acquisit i o n , but ev en m o re useful as a qu ick " how did th e y do tha t aga in"
refr esher. I' v e  found " Lin uxKer nel D ev elopment" (Lo v e ) as  a  very n ice  book
b len din g c onc ep ts with p rogramma ti cex am ple s. So the abov eisma ybe  a sp e ctrumwithi n th is  s t yle  of wri t in g that  I 'v e fo und  h elpfu l.
b . a  more " textbook"  /a lgor it hm ic appr oach? I remem be r thinking  " Com puterN e tworking : A Top-Down Approach"( Kurose,  Ro ss) w as o ne of the  li ghtertex t s
that  didn' t nec es sar i l y fee l "t ext bo ok." "Intr o d uct ion t oInfo rmation 
Retrieval" (Manni n g,Raghavan, Sch utz e) a l s ocom e st o m in d , b u t  more academic. 

~~~
chew xy Idon't thin k  Iam  ever q ualifie d tow rite te xt book m aterial.Bi ts o f the 
book I su spect wi ll be "Ho w  I go t  t o thi s p oint i nthe  code ".

Th e rewillbe a l ot  of sh ow-by -e xample.I've written half a cha pter s o far  an d
it does  re a lly  feel lik e I' m just ann ota tin g mycod e , whi ch i s n' t a goodthin g .

~~~
ve r ge man I  h ear that -s k i m t hroug h L o ve
 caters_to multiple_reading levels, from newbies_to advanced_readers?<p>What_to you,_makes_good writing?
======
swanson
Not strictly_computer science -_but the one textbook_that I really_liked_from
my computer engineering degree was "Computer Organization and Design: The
Hardware/Software Interface" ([http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Organization-
Design-Fourth-Ed...](http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Organization-Design-
Fourth-Edition/dp/0123747503)). It was_surprisingly_readable and_easy_to
follow._It covers the design of_a MIPS processor from the_ground up_(ALU,
caches, memory, pipelining, etc) and also is self-aware_enough_to not pretend
that_x86/ARM don't exist.

------
vergeman
I suppose it depends on your approach_- my two cents - is_your book...

a. geared_toward_programming_/ learning a language?_I've been surprised, given
the sparsity, the_efficacy of a "showing-by-example" style of_writing seen in
the Apache Thrift documentation. K&R_(to me) is decent for language
acquisition,_but even more useful as_a quick_"how did they do that_again"
refresher. I've found_"Linux Kernel_Development" (Love) as_a very nice book
blending concepts with_programmatic examples. So_the above is maybe a spectrum
within_this_style of writing_that_I've_found helpful.

b._a more "textbook"_/_algorithmic approach?_I_remember thinking "Computer
Networking: A Top-Down Approach"_(Kurose,_Ross) was one of the lighter texts
that_didn't necessarily feel "textbook."_"Introduction_to Information
Retrieval" (Manning, Raghavan,_Schutze) also comes to mind,_but more academic.

~~~
chewxy
I don't think I_am ever_qualified to_write text book material. Bits of the
book I suspect will be_"How I got to this point_in the code".

There will_be a_lot_of show-by-example. I've_written_half a_chapter so far and
it does really feel_like I'm_just annotating my code, which isn't_a good
thing.

~~~
vergeman
I hear that_-_skim through Love