<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>SICP &#8211; Harry Jackson</title>
	<atom:link href="http://127.0.0.1:8090/category/sicp/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://127.0.0.1:8090</link>
	<description>Parent, Painter, Programmer</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 06:52:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Learning Computer Science</title>
		<link>http://127.0.0.1:8090/learning-computer-science.htm</link>
					<comments>http://127.0.0.1:8090/learning-computer-science.htm#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[harry]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 06:52:33 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mathematics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SICP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SICP Autodidact]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hjackson.org/wp/?p=378</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This is an update from to my earlier&#160; Self Taught Computer Science post. I&#8217;ve started working on the SICP Exercises and so far so good. I&#8217;m finding Scheme, the variation I&#8217;m using, frustrating but thats to be expected. It&#8217;s frustrating because there appears to be no actual standard implementation of Scheme. It&#8217;s also perverse that, &#8230; <p class="link-more"><a href="http://127.0.0.1:8090/learning-computer-science.htm" class="more-link">Continue reading<span class="screen-reader-text"> "Learning Computer Science"</span></a></p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is an update from to my earlier&nbsp; <a href="http://www.hjackson.org/blog/archives/2008/12/07/self-taught-computer-science">Self Taught Computer Science</a> post.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve started working on the <a href="http://www.boozled.org/wiki/index.php/6.001_Structure_and_Interpretation_of_Computer_Programs">SICP Exercises</a> and so far so good. I&#8217;m finding Scheme, the variation I&#8217;m using, frustrating but thats to be expected. It&#8217;s frustrating because there appears to be no actual standard implementation of Scheme. It&#8217;s also perverse that, because it appears so simple, and there&#8217;s no standard implementation, people try and create a compliant version of Scheme. Perhaps this is testament to how hard it is to follow a standard as opposed to blazing your own trail the way a lot of popular languages do. There&#8217;s another blog post in here somewhere comparing languages that follow standards and languages that &#8230;. evolve!</p>
<p>I&#8217;m using the DrScheme IDE and I love it for its simplicity. Even though Scheme is frustrating I&#8217;m finding it easy to work with. I know Functional languages are based on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda_calculus">Lambda Calculus</a> but until I started working in Scheme I hadn&#8217;t realised how easy it is to think in functions. This can probably be attributed to the SICP exercises being heavily slanted towards computation and interesting mathematical functions like the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallis_product">Wallis Product</a> or the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_number">Fibonacci Sequence</a>. Regardless, I&#8217;m finding it easier to think mathematically in Scheme than Perl or Java.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve done one exercise in Haskell so far and its been painful. This is not because Haskell is painful it&#8217;s just that almost every tutorial on Haskell I find first wants to teach me how to use the <b>Haskell calculator</b> (my derogatory term for the interpreter), as opposed to telling me how to get the thing to compile a standalone executable. That last sentence is a rant, as I&#8217;m digging into Haskell I&#8217;m finding more material. I really don&#8217;t know what it is about this language that I find so appealing. I&#8217;ve seen some really negative reviews of Haskell online but I cannot bring myself to hate it even though it&#8217;s driving me a bit mad learning it. Only time will tell if Haskell and me are meant to get on.</p>
<p>So far I&#8217;m finding SICP time consuming but digestible. I&#8217;m noticing a marked increase in complexity, I&#8217;m just hoping I can get through enough during my holidays to learn something. </p>
<p></p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>http://127.0.0.1:8090/learning-computer-science.htm/feed</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
