Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
188 of 197 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Definitive, June 15, 1999
By A Customer
As Knuth himself says, it is impossible for any one person to keep up with all the research in computer science, but these 3 volumes do a remarkably good job of distilling the most important results and explaining them with mathematical rigor.Each volume contains 2 chapters. Ch. 1, Basic Concepts: mathematical foundations and a description of MIX, a hypothetical machine (now available in software emulations). Ch. 2, Information Structures: lists, trees, memory allocation, garbage collection. Ch. 3, Random Numbers: how to produce series of "random" numbers and test their statistical properties. Ch. 4, Arithmetic: algorithms for integer and floating-point arithmetic. Ch. 5, Sorting: both in memory and on disks or tapes. Ch. 6, Searching: sequential, binary, hashing. Despite the detailed coverage of the topics, which often involves esoteric mathematical notation, the author's lively style makes the algorithms and the main theoretical results relatively easy to grasp. If all you care about is getting a program to run, buy another book; but if you really want to understand how and why software works, there's nothing quite like this.
|
|
|
115 of 120 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent, for certain people!, April 4, 2000
By A Customer
These books are indisputably classics of the field, and like all classics they have religious adherents and equally firm detractors. The key difference between the two groups is that the adherents are interested in computer SCIENCE, whereas the rest are more taken with computer programming. The books are well written, quite mathematical, and abstract. The books deal with the core subjects of computer science and shy away from the trendy, and so some people tend to see them as anachronistic. Nevertheless, they are deservedly core references in computer science, and a joy for any patient, theoretically minded reader. There are three points I believe should be made. 1) a lot of the detractors of the books are saying correct things: the books don't deal with hot topics, they do present things in greater detail than is necessary in day to day programming, they are books they require a lot of the reader. What they don't recognize is that this is the intention, and that there is nothing wrong with that. The book is targeted at those with a geniune interest in theoretical computer science. 2) many reviewers complain about Knuth's typesetting system, TeX. What they fail to recognize is that TeX is incredibly useful, and about as user friendly as could be expected, for the task for which it was designed: typesetting professional quality mathematics. Anyone who challenges this statement would have to contend with virtually the entire community of people who write papers using higher mathematics, including virtually all professional physicists, mathematicians, and computer scientists. 3) some people accuse Knuth's books of being poorly written. These people are ignorant: either they have not read the works, or they would not recognize skillful writing if they saw it. These books are splendid examples of scientific writing, and are justifiably acclaimed as such. In short, Knuth's books have ensured that the word "science" deserves its place in the phrase "computer science"
|
|
|
56 of 60 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Yeah, but is it art?, December 9, 2005
Twenty five years ago, after five years of experience programming scientific applications (mostly math stuff, not much real programming beyond algorithms) I began a job programming business applications. At that time, there was very little general communal knowledge about very basic stuff we take for granted today like searching, sorting, memory allocation, data structures...
I began my collection with Knuth and another book (no longer in print) dedicated to data structures. These books defined me as a programmer. I learned MIX only because, as a programmer, I felt that I should be able to understand Knuth's abstraction. I admit that I was frustrated by having to do this. Ironically, even back then, the "other book" used, what was the de facto standard for generically describing algorithms, an ALGOL like language-very pretty!
Many of us have looked forward to Knuth rewriting his artful collection to satisfy our sense of aesthetics. We don't consider that he would have to repeat this huge task over and over again. Or (save me from this one) he could produce an obnoxious series of books titled "The Art of Computer Programming in C", "The Art of Computer Programming in C++", "The Art of Computer Programming in JAVA", "The Art of Computer Programming in C#", and (my favorite) "The Art of Computer Programming for Dummies". I thank Knuth for not doing this, although the last would certainly have a wide audience. Publishers know what they are about.
Another reason, in my humble opinion, that Knuth probably holds to MIX is that the latest generation of programmers do not have a clue what it is like to program a machine directly, or what is happening underneath the hood. There is a huge leap from MIX to MACRO, but the basic principles are still relevant.
The bottom line: YOU CAN COMPLETELY IGNORE MIX! All the relevant ideas are explained in simple plane English and the algorithms in structured English. Those who would prefer not to understand, but to simply cut and paste code, you are simply out of luck.
Now, if that isn't insulting enough (you caught me on a good day (after 32 years of programming I have come to hate computers and ...)) you would be amazed at how many self proclaimed senior programmers (programmers with more than three years of experience?) can't write an algorithm to save their lives.
BUY THE BOOKS! THEYRE A BARGAIN!
By the way, you all should read some of Knuth's other works. How many of us know that Knuth was an important player in getting rid of GOTO statements? I haven't written a GOTO statement in over twenty years! If my memory serves me (on a good day) Knuth wrote in an April edition of the ACM a paper titled, "Goto Bad, ComeFrom Good". He would be pleased to know that he anticipated the Publish-Subscribe Architectural Pattern.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Donald E. Knuth
by Thomas H. Cormen
See all Editorial Reviews
