/g/ programmers' opinion on the best way to learn?

>>57633290
>Does /g/ agree that this is the only proper way to learn programming?
No.
I oppose any statement claiming that there's only 1 true way for anything

>>57633366
OK but what do you think about the value of going through those 3 books?

>>57633290
>C#
DONOTDOTHIS

>>57633603
C# is basically "C++" done right.

>>57633290
C# is a great first language. It's easy to learn, and you can start creating things pretty quickly.

It also has more available jobs than C, only second to Java (disregarded JS and SQL) so it's good to have in your toolbelt.

It depends on what you want to do. Unless you're planning on doing unmanaged languages, writing hardware drivers, and maintaining kernels, there's not much reason to even bother with C.

Where can I find the listed books for free?

>>57633833
My small goal would be to make a simple game like nibbles ("snake") in something like Unity. How long should I study pure C# before going into Unity?

>>57633290
>Code, by Charles Petzold.
>>The C Programming Language, K&R
>>The Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, Abelson and Sussman.
Perfect desu

>>57633837
http://book4you.org/
you can find all those 3 PDFs for free there, and many, many other books.

>>57633896
>How long should I study pure C# before going into Unity?
You could probably jump right in, to be honest.

Using something like Unity is a great way to learn C# syntax, because you immediately start associating variables and methods with things and stuff happening, as long as you follow a good tutorial.

It wouldn't hurt to run through some of what I consider the best learning book:
http://www.robmiles.com/c-yellow-book/

There's a link to the free PDF on the page, but the book does a good job of explaining modern programming before you jump right into code.

File: eb1.jpg (391KB, 1024x768px)

391KB, 1024x768px

Read 20k lines of code, Google anything you don't understand.

Write 10k lines of code, Google anything you don't know how to do

I've tried manly languages and I always find myself going back to C. It's just so minimalistic and elegant, especially the standard library with its simple solutions for things and all the choices for libraries you can work with (pick and choose) I'll never use a language with GC and OOP in loo, I'm ok with fixing memory leaks / security holes

>>57633918
thanks, anon

>>57633739
Pajeet pls go.

>>57635255
Not an argument.

These are some of the best books in CS, but there are like 10-20 more which are just as good. The "properness" of the way depends on the person that wants to learn. My advice is that if you find yourself lurking on /g/ for an advice on how to start programming, start with something practical.

>>57633290
>Someone who doesn't know a single goddamn thing about education talking about the best way to educate others with his only qualification being that he made an incredibly popular website
I don't know why Spolsky doesn't just up and become a regular poster on /g/, he'd fit right in. Zuckerberg, too.

For OP, C# is a legitimately good first language so long as you pick up concepts over per-language fundamentals first. You were already recommended the C# Yellow Book which is probably the single-best introductory book for C# I've read. It's very human and Miles covers programming concepts rather than "this is how you do [x] in C#". There are cookbooks and google for that, anyway. If you can put out a few clones of already-existing projects or you can solve a number of your own problems programmatically, you're pretty golden.

However, I highly recommend going for C soon after, sooner rather than later. C development positions aren't exactly publicly popular but working with pointers and managing your memory rather than going "oh I'll let the garbage collector take care of it" goes a long way. I will also say that Spolsky's recommendation of "Code" isn't bad; it's a really REALLY good book for people who have never ever thought about programming in their lives before reading it. I just think that Spolsky is not qualified to talk about what it means to teach others.

Finally, don't post here. You'll find nothing but consumerism and gigantic egos about programming languages/concepts.

>>57633937
hilarious seeing my old lecturer's book on here. He's a fucking twat but his book is ok.

>>57635702
That's pretty cool.

Yeah, sounds like he'd be a bit of a cunt, but I really enjoyed reading through; very dry sense of humor, but keeps it engaging.

>>57633290
Spolsky is on point.

If you don't already understand all of this OR cannot force yourself to learn it all (and it's only fundamental Computer Science in these three books) then just give up.

You'll NEVER be a good programmer if you can't manage to get through these 3 simple books.

>>57635503
Because "cpp done right" is one?

>>57635744
It quite literally is.

However, if someone makes an assertion and your response is to simply throw out an insult, that is literally NOT an argument.

>>57633904
>Code, by Charles Petzold.
Nice. Thanks for the rec.

>>57635766
>it's better because I say so
perhaps you should look up the definition of "valid" before you post again.

I've started learning C recently and I have a basic grasp of pointers.
But I've became interested in C# as well. Should I just continue with C and learn C# at a later time or should I reverse the order?

>>57635788
>perhaps you should look up the definition of "valid" before you post again.
Perhaps you should read the thread.

Not a single anon used the word "valid" in this thread.

>>57635814
It really depends on what you want to do.

I'd be willing to bet that you don't have any inherent use for C, although it's not a bad thing to learn.

See >>57633833

>>57635814
Definitely gain a solid understanding of C. Do at least one large project in C before learning a new language. You'll thank me later, I assure you.

>>57635830
Yeah. I think that's probably true.
>>57635841
What would you define as solid understanding and how large of a project should I do first?

No, that was an elitist bullshit answer

I haven't read any of those books, only a little bit of K&R, and I can create well documented base classes and find memory leaks just fine

File: 1477379633642.jpg (106KB, 554x439px)

106KB, 554x439px

>>57633960

>mfw my job is Googling

>>57635736
The question is, is it not better to focus on practical first, learn c# get junior dev job and then read those 3 books instead of starting with them?

>>57635965
Maybe, but you'll require a lot of babysitting, handholding and wasting my fucking time when you could have just learned it right in the first place. Instead you're all fucking useless cunts. Hate this new wave of Java/C# fucking twats that can't do shit by themselves.

File: hime.jpg (73KB, 736x992px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 736x992px

>>57635736
Spolsky is a hack with a blog, and idiots like you value his narrow opinions and mindset. Good grief, if he was worth his salt he would have wrote a book valued as much as the three in the post.

>>57633290
OP, If you are interested in making things work and actually interested in programming, just get your hands dirty and pick anything. There is no "proper way to learn programming". If you want to really understand what is going on with various modern programming languages, that sequence of books will do you a great service. They illustrate useful ways to evaluate abstract problems for translation into code of any language.

The satisfaction you get from making things work, and what you will learn when they don't work is worth far more than a guy who did a thing's post on stacksexchange.

>>57635766
It's quite literally not even close to one.

I have one though. C++ is native to your OS, making it faster. Just because you like C# more doesn't make it good