New - Need Help

[Thomas A. Bryan]

> >Does anyone know whether the Sam's (Python in 24 Hours?) book is any better
> >for a first-time programmer?  If not, I'll can post a bunch of notes and
> >exercises that I wrote to supplement _Learning_Python_ for my wife.
> 
> Well, it's aimed at the first-time programmer.  It's hard for me to
> judge whether it actually succeeds, but I think I've seen a couple of
> favorable comments posted.

_Learning_Python_ attempts to aim at both the first time programmer 
and someone who has already finished a Programming 101 class in Pascal 
or C and someone who has some practical programming experience in a 
language other than Python but who isn't necessary a seasoned professional.  
I think that by attempting to aim at so many different audiences, they 
really end up missing the beginner in a lot of places.  

For example, a beginner might not really even know what a program 
is. Some people might learn by being dragged through the first few 
chapters, but most "beginning" books I have seen give some sort of 
background to orient the students.  Sections on loops generally have 
some sort of introduction to the whole concept of looping.  All 
sections try to teach both a topic and why it is useful in practice.  
I think that _Learning_Python_ really leaves a lot to be desired in 
these respects.  I should have guessed as much, but I saw the favorable 
reviews here too.  For example, the terms "call a function," "function 
call," and "caller" are never really defined.  The terms are used with 
some context, but it can leave a beginner feeling like he must have 
missed a page somewhere.  A beginner's book should also NEVER have 
examples with variable names like X and y.  Remember, students learn 
by example, and if the *book* uses variable names like that, I guess 
that's what all professional programmers use.  Yuck.

Since _Learning_Python_ aims for many audiences, they also sometimes 
introduce vaguely obscure elements of loops or functions or whatever 
with all of the other material.  That's great for someone who wants 
a comprehensive Python text, but I'd be happier with more coverage 
of basics and less complete coverage.  Or at least complete coverage 
with a "digging deeper" section at the end of each chapter that 
beginners can safely skip on their first time through the book.

Don't get me wrong.  I actually like _Learning_Python_ quite a bit. 
I think that it could make a good book for a first course or for a 
programmer teaching his friend.  The teacher can fill in the gaps,  
and the student is left with a nice, trim book that doesn't have 
any fluff once they've internalized a bunch of programmer folklore.  
I would simply never recommend _Learning_Python_ to a beginner 
programmer to read by himself.  

It's also a good book with some sort of programming background.  If 
they already know about functions and loops and typing code into 
text files and such, then _Learning_Python_ is a great no-nonsense, 
intro to the core of the language.

Pedagogically yours,
---Tom