1. 9
  1.  

  2. 10

    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.

    1. 1

      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?