This is curious to me. Because I first bought the 3rd and latest edition of this book, as you do, but then I read reviews that the 2nd edition was superior. So I picked up the 2nd edition since I saw it for a cheap price used. Now, here I am reading that the 1st edition is better. Haha.
What would you recommend for someone to start with regarding this particular book? (I haven't gone through the book yet.) Is there a technical reason why material was changed so drastically, or is it more along the lines of streamlining things for a university course? Are the things left out in the subsequent editions interesting but not useful or are they interesting and useful but not conducive to fitting into a one or two semester course sequence?
Really I don't feel up-to-date enough to give great guidance. I worked through most of the problems in the first edition back when it came out, and it significantly influenced my approach to programming. With the later editions I gave them a pretty superficial read. There are other newer textbooks like Shriram Krishnamurthi's which I haven't read at all.
I don't think the first is 'better', but as examples of how it was more fun there's the compiler chapter and an OOP chapter with a small OO language organized around metaclasses instead of what I remember as a more tedious development of Java-style OO in a later edition. I'd still expect the latest edition has the most to learn from if you're picking just one.
Thanks! It sounds like a good approach would be to work diligently through the 3rd and then circle back on the 1st and 2nd to pick up the little spots that didn't make it. The metaclasses thing seems pretty interesting.
This book has been waiting on me to go through it. It's on the list with finishing SICP and also PLAI.
What would you recommend for someone to start with regarding this particular book? (I haven't gone through the book yet.) Is there a technical reason why material was changed so drastically, or is it more along the lines of streamlining things for a university course? Are the things left out in the subsequent editions interesting but not useful or are they interesting and useful but not conducive to fitting into a one or two semester course sequence?