>What is this thread for? To discuss, request for / give recommendations, and overall promote the usage of Computer Science Books as a means of learning. >Who is this thread for? Everybody, for all levels of skill. There will always be a book that perfectly fits well with what you want to learn based on what level you're at. You have no excuse, start reading. If you're not ready to dedicate enough of your time to at least finish one chapter each week (3 if you're a NEET), then fuck off we're full. >Where do I begin? github.com/galoget/free-programming-books/blob/master/free-programming-books.md >This is too much info to take in wiki.installgentoo.com/wiki/Programming_resources >This is still too much info to take in This thread isn't for you. >I can't decide between two books / what I'm looking for isn't here This is what the thread is for. Use Z-Lib and LibGen.
There's your fucking sticky, now sit down and read.
just solve all the leetcode problems what more do you need?
Jack Flores
Well books are nice if you aspire to be more than a bugman problem solver
Adam Martin
>the pragmatic programmer not a CS book >art of unix programming not a CS book >the cathedral and the bazaar not a CS book >concepts, techniques, and models of computer programming not a CS book >code complete not a CS book >the science of programming not a CS book >the C programming language while based, not a CS book >real world Haskell not a CS book >learn you a Haskell for great good not a CS book >land of lisp not a CS book >software foundations not a CS book >design patterns again, more of a software patterns book
CS is about solving problem with computation. The books mentioned above are way more about wielding languages and some software patterns or practice. The latter is important to do, but it's distinct from CS because it's largely about learning to wield tools. There's a difference between astronomy and telescope design / use, even though the latter involves and is used for the former. This just leaves a couple of algorithms books and Knuth classics. I'll list more CS books in my next post
Nathaniel Mitchell
This is my plan for the next year. Oh look its this asshole.
I don't usually go into these threads, but I can only imagine people say the same thing I do because the overwhelming majority of what's posted on your list and most of OP's list isn't CS. Software is important but it's not CS. For example >The Linux Command Line >Mastering Ubuntu Sever >C Programming What makes you think these are CS? They're, at worst, knowledge you can just google, and at best, skills picked up from projects, assignments, and internships. The material in the books isn't synthesizing or applying engineering knowledge or technique - they are manuals on how to use a machine. The operation manual for a machine does not amount to an engineering subject, much less CS.
CSAPP, OS: 3 easy pieces, the Parallel Processor book, and Algorithms in C are indeed CS books. While the words "programming" and "programmer" are used in a couple of them, these books are either about structure and how to solve practical problems. The parallel processors book even talks about how GPU parallelism impacts real world cases like MRI. These are CS books.
literally right above you no u. technician books on how to read a command line or write a line of code aren't CS. an engineering/math subject involves...engineering. the technician knowledge is stuff you pick up, but the goal of CS is to solve problems using computers, not to study digitally plumbing software packages.
Brody Morgan
Okay, so you're splitting hairs over theory and applied.
Adam Russell
this is my first time going to Any Forums in like 10 months. I'm not who you think I am. lol computer "science" is what they teach in a lot of undergrads. this doesn't change the fact that there's still real CS done by real computer scientists and studied by a much smaller subset of the CS undergrad body. Again, terribly sorry that you're either a technical plumber who deals with shitty software packages or an EE who landed a job and is quickly realizing that it's just application-specific codemonkeying. Cadence and Matlab won't save you from codemonkeydom
Michael Robinson
But I'm not here. Applied CS still solves problems. Applied CS involves shit like OS design, concurrency, parallelism, distributed algorithms, machine learning, graphics processing and physics simulation, etc.. A book that teaches you command line prompts, syntax, or basic server etiquette isn't CS. It's a machine manual.
Andrew Sanchez
Again with the failed EE cope kek majored in CS and minored in physics, im working on quantum computing shit that none of you seething EE pajeets could even dream of understanding.
this is applied CS because you're studying robotics in motion. you're solving problems of robotic locomotion and coordination using a computer. yeah it involves systems level programming, ROS, etc.., but that stuff is not the CS. It's used to implement the solution - and is thus important - but is not material in CS and should be picked up outside of "class time." (i.e. you should be able to get it from reference or google)
I mention this because learning CS is about learning how to solve real problems, not about cutting down your times for trivial google searches. That stuff is important in its own right, but the longer it gets confused to CS, the longer we'll have people complain about the job market when the deep specialization hits like it's hit every other sector of engineering. The longer we'll have people get nothing out of their university degree they chose to make out of completely useless classes that don't teach them anything a google search couldn't have. the reason I'm so fucking adamant is because you should treat your learning time as precious and thus occupy it reading actual high value material - shit that will let you solve problems no matter what subfield you end up liking.
in the end, you can always google something you need to program in a specific environment. but it's not so simple to understand how google's pagerank uses stochastic matrices to make a multimillion dollar, fast search engine. Doesn't this strike you as much more fundamental and high impact than cracking open a book that tells you makefile syntax that you could have easily googled?
Lucas Carter
it's bait retard quantum computing is open to anyone in mathematical stem, so it has people from CS, EE, physics, math, etc.. working on it
Advanced Algorithms and Data Structures - Manning Publications
Aaron Gonzalez
can someone tell me how fucked I am for missing out on computer architecture?
my school only required computer organization. architecture was optional but highly-recommended. is it really as useful as people are making it out to be? im probably going to end up in full stack engineering.
Tyler Richardson
So, do you need to be dyslexic to program in C#, or is "C Shark" a thing?
Carson Murphy
>the science of programming Seems like Computer Science to me, agree on most the others though. According to the description of The Science of Programming: This is the very first book to discuss the theory and principles of computer programming on the basis of the idea that a proof of correctness and a program should be developed hand in hand. It is built around the method first proposed by Dijkstra in his monograph The Discipline of Programming (1976).
Blake Morris
>So, do you need to be dyslexic to program in C#, or is "C Shark" a thing?
