Observation on "Core Python Programming"

[John Coleman]

Greetings,
My copy of the second edition of Chun's "Core Python Programming"
just arrived from Amazon on Friday. What really jumped out at me is an
interesting feature about how it sequences its topics, namely,
(user-defined) functions are not introduced until chapter 11, fully 400
pages into the book. This contrasts strongly with a traditional
"Introducti on to language X" book which has a chapter sequence roughy
like:

Chapter 1) Intro - Hello World
Chapter 2) Variables
Chapter 3) If, if-else
Chapter 4) Loops
Chapter 5) Functions and/or subroutines

The exact details vary from book to book and language to language of
course, but usually the above topics are covered in the first 100-150
pages since it is hard to do anything interesting until all of these
tools are under your belt. Chun's book by contrast is able, on the
strength of Python's built-in functions, to cover a fair amount of
relatively interesting things (dictionaries, file IO, exception
handling, etc.) before introducing user-defined functions.

I don't want to read too much into this, but the mere fact that it is
possible to write a Python book in this fashion seems to confirm the
"batteries are included" philosophy of Python. Perhaps there is less
need to learn how to roll your own batteries as soon as possible.

-John Coleman

[Nick Vatamaniuc]

Re: Observation on "Core Python Programming&quo t;

I would consider that an omission. Functions are very important in
Python. I think the user/reader should see the _def_ and _class_
statement fairly soon in the introduction. The name of the book is
thus somewhat misleading, because functions are at the "core" of
Python.

Functions should be right there with the integers, strings, files,
lists and dictionaries. Another important point to stress, in my
opinion, is that functions are first-class objects. In other words
functions can be passes around just like strings and numbers!

-Nick Vatamaniuc


John Coleman wrote:

Greetings,
My copy of the second edition of Chun's "Core Python Programming"
just arrived from Amazon on Friday. What really jumped out at me is an
interesting feature about how it sequences its topics, namely,
(user-defined) functions are not introduced until chapter 11, fully 400
pages into the book. This contrasts strongly with a traditional
"Introducti on to language X" book which has a chapter sequence roughy
like:
>
Chapter 1) Intro - Hello World
Chapter 2) Variables
Chapter 3) If, if-else
Chapter 4) Loops
Chapter 5) Functions and/or subroutines
>
The exact details vary from book to book and language to language of
course, but usually the above topics are covered in the first 100-150
pages since it is hard to do anything interesting until all of these
tools are under your belt. Chun's book by contrast is able, on the
strength of Python's built-in functions, to cover a fair amount of
relatively interesting things (dictionaries, file IO, exception
handling, etc.) before introducing user-defined functions.
>
I don't want to read too much into this, but the mere fact that it is
possible to write a Python book in this fashion seems to confirm the
"batteries are included" philosophy of Python. Perhaps there is less
need to learn how to roll your own batteries as soon as possible.
>
-John Coleman

[Fredrik Lundh]

Re: Observation on "Core Python Programming&quo t;

Nick Vatamaniuc wrote:

I would consider that an omission. Functions are very important in
Python. I think the user/reader should see the _def_ and _class_
statement fairly soon in the introduction. The name of the book is
thus somewhat misleading, because functions are at the "core" of
Python.

have you read the book?

</F>

[John Coleman]

Re: Observation on &quot;Core Python Programming&quo t;

A is not ommitted from DBECAFG - it just appears in a non-standard
order. If the book simply ommitted functions then it would be a
shocking ommission. As it is, it is just a curious way of sequencing
topics. Functions are in chapter 11 out of 23 chapters - sounds like
the "core" of the book to me.

Chun does emphasize the first-class status of functions in Python -
something which is fairly important to me since I have dabbled on and
off with functional programming the last few years (mostly SML) and am
interested in seeing the extend to which Python is genuinely
"multi-paradigm" - able to blend the functional and imperative (and OO)
paradigms together.

-John Coleman

Nick Vatamaniuc wrote:

I would consider that an omission. Functions are very important in
Python. I think the user/reader should see the _def_ and _class_
statement fairly soon in the introduction. The name of the book is
thus somewhat misleading, because functions are at the "core" of
Python.
>
Functions should be right there with the integers, strings, files,
lists and dictionaries. Another important point to stress, in my
opinion, is that functions are first-class objects. In other words
functions can be passes around just like strings and numbers!
>
-Nick Vatamaniuc
>
>
John Coleman wrote:

Greetings,
My copy of the second edition of Chun's "Core Python Programming"
just arrived from Amazon on Friday. What really jumped out at me is an
interesting feature about how it sequences its topics, namely,
(user-defined) functions are not introduced until chapter 11, fully 400
pages into the book. This contrasts strongly with a traditional
"Introducti on to language X" book which has a chapter sequence roughy
like:

Chapter 1) Intro - Hello World
Chapter 2) Variables
Chapter 3) If, if-else
Chapter 4) Loops
Chapter 5) Functions and/or subroutines

The exact details vary from book to book and language to language of
course, but usually the above topics are covered in the first 100-150
pages since it is hard to do anything interesting until all of these
tools are under your belt. Chun's book by contrast is able, on the
strength of Python's built-in functions, to cover a fair amount of
relatively interesting things (dictionaries, file IO, exception
handling, etc.) before introducing user-defined functions.

I don't want to read too much into this, but the mere fact that it is
possible to write a Python book in this fashion seems to confirm the
"batteries are included" philosophy of Python. Perhaps there is less
need to learn how to roll your own batteries as soon as possible.

-John Coleman

[Nick Vatamaniuc]

Re: Observation on &quot;Core Python Programming&quo t;

I meant "omitted" not as complete omission but as not being there
sooner...

John Coleman wrote:

A is not ommitted from DBECAFG - it just appears in a non-standard
order. If the book simply ommitted functions then it would be a
shocking ommission. As it is, it is just a curious way of sequencing
topics. Functions are in chapter 11 out of 23 chapters - sounds like
the "core" of the book to me.
>
Chun does emphasize the first-class status of functions in Python -
something which is fairly important to me since I have dabbled on and
off with functional programming the last few years (mostly SML) and am
interested in seeing the extend to which Python is genuinely
"multi-paradigm" - able to blend the functional and imperative (and OO)
paradigms together.
>
-John Coleman
>
Nick Vatamaniuc wrote:

I would consider that an omission. Functions are very important in
Python. I think the user/reader should see the _def_ and _class_
statement fairly soon in the introduction. The name of the book is
thus somewhat misleading, because functions are at the "core" of
Python.

Functions should be right there with the integers, strings, files,
lists and dictionaries. Another important point to stress, in my
opinion, is that functions are first-class objects. In other words
functions can be passes around just like strings and numbers!

-Nick Vatamaniuc


John Coleman wrote:

Greetings,
My copy of the second edition of Chun's "Core Python Programming"
just arrived from Amazon on Friday. What really jumped out at me is an
interesting feature about how it sequences its topics, namely,
(user-defined) functions are not introduced until chapter 11, fully 400
pages into the book. This contrasts strongly with a traditional
"Introducti on to language X" book which has a chapter sequence roughy
like:
>
Chapter 1) Intro - Hello World
Chapter 2) Variables
Chapter 3) If, if-else
Chapter 4) Loops
Chapter 5) Functions and/or subroutines
>
The exact details vary from book to book and language to language of
course, but usually the above topics are covered in the first 100-150
pages since it is hard to do anything interesting until all of these
tools are under your belt. Chun's book by contrast is able, on the
strength of Python's built-in functions, to cover a fair amount of
relatively interesting things (dictionaries, file IO, exception
handling, etc.) before introducing user-defined functions.
>
I don't want to read too much into this, but the mere fact that it is
possible to write a Python book in this fashion seems to confirm the
"batteries are included" philosophy of Python. Perhaps there is less
need to learn how to roll your own batteries as soon as possible.
>
-John Coleman

[Nick Vatamaniuc]

Re: Observation on &quot;Core Python Programming&quo t;

....Skimmed through the previous edition.

I don't normally read programming books -- just use the chapters that I
need when I need them, unless of course there is a clever plot twist
coming up ahead (for ex.: "Next: The revenge of lambdas. Will they
stay or will they go?" ;-)

Why? Have you read it from beginning to end. What did you think about
functions being introduced later than files and exceptions?

-Nick V.

Fredrik Lundh wrote:

Nick Vatamaniuc wrote:
>

I would consider that an omission. Functions are very important in
Python. I think the user/reader should see the _def_ and _class_
statement fairly soon in the introduction. The name of the book is
thus somewhat misleading, because functions are at the "core" of
Python.

>
have you read the book?
>
</F>

[UrsusMaximus@gmail.com]

Re: Observation on &quot;Core Python Programming&quo t;

I must say I find Wesley Chun's explanations to be most understandable.
I cant' exactly figure out why yet, but he has a way of explaining
something, like, say, decorators, that in minimal words elucidates for
me the intent behind why they are useful. That helps me understand how
they work. I just finished reading the chapter on Functions for the
book, I guess I was partly prompted by this thread on the newsgroup. it
was a *very* quick read, I could scan quickly but gain a better
understanding of the whole topic of functions in Python, including
inner functions, closures, decorators, continuations, and coroutines.
Talk about bang for the buck, that half hour to 45 minutes of reading
new chapter in Wesley Chun's new book was the best investment of time i
have made in quite a while.

I really like this book. I really, really, really like it.

Ron Stephens

[David Lees]

Re: Observation on &quot;Core Python Programming&quo t;

John Coleman wrote:

Greetings,
My copy of the second edition of Chun's "Core Python Programming"
just arrived from Amazon on Friday. What really jumped out at me is an
interesting feature about how it sequences its topics, namely,
(user-defined) functions are not introduced until chapter 11, fully 400
pages into the book. This contrasts strongly with a traditional

<snip>

Pages 48-50 is a section titled: 'Functions' and he gives both a top
level description and example. True he does not have a chapter devoted
to functions still page 400, but he does give examples of usage along
the way.

david lees

>

[John Salerno]

Re: Observation on &quot;Core Python Programming&quo t;

John Coleman wrote:

Greetings,
My copy of the second edition of Chun's "Core Python Programming"
just arrived from Amazon on Friday.

Who would you say the book is aimed at? Advanced programmers? I thought
about getting it, but I'm not sure if it will be either 1) too much
repetition of the basics I've already learned (which isn't necessarily a
bad thing), or 2) too advanced for me right now.

Thanks.

[John Coleman]

Re: Observation on &quot;Core Python Programming&quo t;


John Salerno wrote:

John Coleman wrote:

Greetings,
My copy of the second edition of Chun's "Core Python Programming"
just arrived from Amazon on Friday.

>
Who would you say the book is aimed at? Advanced programmers? I thought
about getting it, but I'm not sure if it will be either 1) too much
repetition of the basics I've already learned (which isn't necessarily a
bad thing), or 2) too advanced for me right now.
>
Thanks.

It strikes me as being aimed at intermediate programmers who don't have
much familiarity with Python. I bought it since my only other book on
Python ("Learning Python" by Lutz) is somewhat dated now and because I
find that I'm a slow learner and it usually takes me a couple of books
by independent authors to "get" a language. The publisher's page is
more informative than what you see on Amazon. You can see the table of
contents and read a sample chapter there to help you decide if the book
is for you:

http://vig.prenhall.com/catalog/academic/product/1,4096,0130260363,00.html

HTH

-John Coleman

[John Coleman]

Re: Observation on &quot;Core Python Programming&quo t;


John Coleman wrote:

John Salerno wrote:

John Coleman wrote:

Greetings,
My copy of the second edition of Chun's "Core Python Programming"
just arrived from Amazon on Friday.

Who would you say the book is aimed at? Advanced programmers? I thought
about getting it, but I'm not sure if it will be either 1) too much
repetition of the basics I've already learned (which isn't necessarily a
bad thing), or 2) too advanced for me right now.

Thanks.

>
It strikes me as being aimed at intermediate programmers who don't have
much familiarity with Python. I bought it since my only other book on
Python ("Learning Python" by Lutz) is somewhat dated now and because I
find that I'm a slow learner and it usually takes me a couple of books
by independent authors to "get" a language. The publisher's page is
more informative than what you see on Amazon. You can see the table of
contents and read a sample chapter there to help you decide if the book
is for you:

http://vig.prenhall.com/catalog/academic/product/1,4096,0130260363,00.html

>
HTH
>
-John Coleman

I just realized that I gave the link to the first edition site. The
second edition site doesn't give a sample chapter (but does give the
complete preface) and still provides a good feel for the book:

http://vig.prenhall.com/catalog/academic/product/0,1144,0132269937,00.html

Sorry for any confusion

-John Coleman

[John Salerno]

Re: Observation on &quot;Core Python Programming&quo t;

John Coleman wrote:

John Coleman wrote:

>John Salerno wrote:

>>John Coleman wrote:
>>>Greetings,
>>> My copy of the second edition of Chun's "Core Python Programming"
>>>just arrived from Amazon on Friday.
>>Who would you say the book is aimed at? Advanced programmers? I thought
>>about getting it, but I'm not sure if it will be either 1) too much
>>repetition of the basics I've already learned (which isn't necessarily a
>>bad thing), or 2) too advanced for me right now.
>>>
>>Thanks.

>It strikes me as being aimed at intermediate programmers who don't have
>much familiarity with Python. I bought it since my only other book on
>Python ("Learning Python" by Lutz) is somewhat dated now and because I
>find that I'm a slow learner and it usually takes me a couple of books
>by independent authors to "get" a language. The publisher's page is
>more informative than what you see on Amazon. You can see the table of
>contents and read a sample chapter there to help you decide if the book
>is for you:
>http://vig.prenhall.com/catalog/acad...260363,00.html
>>
>HTH
>>
>-John Coleman

>
I just realized that I gave the link to the first edition site. The
second edition site doesn't give a sample chapter (but does give the
complete preface) and still provides a good feel for the book:

http://vig.prenhall.com/catalog/academic/product/0,1144,0132269937,00.html

>
Sorry for any confusion
>
-John Coleman
>

Thanks very much.