This is standard wounded-hero nonsense out of Zed. While I can’t speak to all of his experienced I can at least speak to the portion I was present for:
Many C developers I know were never a fan of his book. It often traded teaching C for teaching the C that compiled on his compiler and on his machine. C is much more abstract than his book teaches.
The problem with his “Deconstructing K&R C” post was that it was simply wrong and did not actually solve the problem it claimed to. It did not guarantee termination nor did it guarantee you system was in a working state after the fact. My rebuttal can be read here: http://functional-orbitz.blogspot.se/2013/01/deconstructing-zeds-k-deconstruction.html
So, in standard Zed style: he is right and everyone else is an asshole and he has no choice but to give into the assholes. Boohoo.
This is standard wounded-hero nonsense out of Zed. While I can’t speak to all of his experienced I can at least speak to the portion I was present for:
So, in standard Zed style: he is right and everyone else is an asshole and he has no choice but to give into the assholes. Boohoo.
He’s replaced the referenced section on the book website. It’s available from archive.org:
https://web.archive.org/web/20141205223016/http://c.learncodethehardway.org/book/krcritique.html
The critique above seems a bit thin and comes across a bit pseudo-theoretical—is there any additional context?