[m1keil]

> This is more about guiding the readers, making sure the expectations are crystal clear and that they can follow me throughout an explanation.

Sure, but this holds true for the blog version as well, right?

To be clear, I'm not advocating for The Little Schemer version, and am not arguing that the blog version is the best it can be, but surely we can agree that book padding phenomenon does exist.

By the way, I have read parts of your book over at O'Reilly Learning, and I do think it is a good book. So I'm not trying to take a dump on your work. My criticism is aimed at publishers.

[teivah]

No worries I didn't take it as a criticism. I understand your point. I mean when we sign a contract there's a minimum number of pages to write. But personally, I never felt the pressure of having to add more stuff.

Instead, my DE multiple times told me that it's better to favor just-in-time teaching over just-in-case teaching. Meaning multiple times, he made me drop certain section because they weren't really serving the chapter. They were "perhaps helpful" and he made me drop all of those.

I guess it also depends on who you're working with and which publisher. On this aspect, Manning was fair, imo.