Deitel and Deitel Book...

[Sheila King]

On Sun, 3 Mar 2002 12:01:03 -0600, "Jason Orendorff" <jason at jorendorff.com>
wrote in comp.lang.python in article
<mailman.1015178825.27707.python-list at python.org>:

> I dislike Deitel & Deitel because of their casual disregard for
> correctness.  I can't open any of their books without finding an error.
> In C++HTP, they illustrate "Circle" as a subclass of "Point". 

Well, it's true I didn't particularly care for that example.

> Maybe they do this because they think it simplifies the point they're
> making, but I think it's a disservice to the student.  Anyone serious
> about programming in C++ will need to know what derived classes
> signify.

I guess I found the book a useful reference, it was easy (for me) to find
stuff in the index (someone here said their indices weren't good, and that
surprised me), plus there are plentiful code examples. But I've only seen
the one text (the C++HTP) and not the others. I don't care for a formulaic
approach to writing programming books, where the author has a book already
in one language and then adapts it to other languages, but this approach is
quite common in the programming textbook arena, and I wouldn't single out
Deitel and Deitel on that point alone. The paper is thin and the binding
does suck, but the binding just came off of my Programming Python 2nd
edition this past month, and often that type of stuff is the publisher's
perogative and not the author's.

Anyhow, now I start to sound like I'm defending D&D, which I'm certainly
not. I was only expressing surprise at the general dislike for their book
that so many have posted in this thread, as it is counter to the opinions
I've encountered on their book in the past. In fact, I know some teachers
who think that their book is practically the C++ gospel or something. I
never had that high an opinion of their book. As I related, I didn't choose
it for the text when I taught C++. I considered several other books, and
ended up with the one by Walter Savitch. And while the narrative was very
good in Savtich's book, there not enough good exercises and programming
assignments for my high school students, and I was always having to search
other books for that type of stuff and often ended up using exercises out
of the Deitel's book. The exercises in C++HTP are very good for instructors
to assign to students and not many books have that type of stuff. 

I'm currently teaching math at the University level, and it seems that I
have LOTS more time to prepare for class than I did at the high school
level, and I don't assign near as much work (I see the students far less
and they are supposed to be more responsible to take some initiative for
the learning on their own). So whether a book with so many exercises is
really necessary for college...still, when I was a student using that text,
I appreciated the availability of those exercises. Even if the instructor
didn't assign them I could do them on my own to my benefit. But for a high
school instructor, a book with a LOT of fairly good exercises has a lot of
appeal over a book with few. The students often don't read the book anyway,
and you can correct the information in the book in class if need be. 

I wonder that the many exercises and code examples are not a large part of
the appeal of this text over some others.

-- 
Sheila King
http://www.thinkspot.net/sheila/

"When introducing your puppy to an adult cat,
restrain the puppy, not the cat." -- Gwen Bailey,
_The Perfect Puppy: How to Raise a Well-behaved Dog_