[rifung]

I don't think your analogy really makes sense; the issue isn't that the author tries to teach people things which are too difficult to handle but that the author may state things which are just incorrect. A better analogy would be teaching beginning drivers to use their knees instead of hands to drive.

I suppose I'm in a different position than you though; I don't see any need to get everyone to start coding. I think if people want to code there are already good books out there, and if they don't then I don't think we need more developers who hate their job.

[wyclif]

What about the C book is incorrect? I want data and citations.

[rifung]

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic but I'll respond in case you aren't. I don't recall saying that I thought there were mistakes in the book; I wouldn't know I haven't read it.

The person I was replying to just didn't seem to understand what anon1385 was trying to say; it's difficult to recommend a book written by someone who writes and teaches on topics he/she doesn't fully understand. There was a link to a thread where the author of a book on C was wrong about one of the fundamental aspects of the language.

Again, I don't have the slightest idea whether there is wrong information in any of the author's books, but I can also see why one would be wary trusting a book written by someone who has shown a serious lack of mastery on previous occasion.

I believe the person I was replying to misunderstood the cause of concern as being one where a person is taught poor or suboptimal practices as opposed to one where a person is taught things which are just flat out incorrect.

[wyclif]

So IOW, you don't actually have a valid criticism of LCTHW. Got it.

[rifung]

Indeed. No idea why you thought I was attempting to criticize it, validly or not. I was just trying to elaborate on a previous comment that someone else seemed to have misinterpreted.