Newbie needs book advice
Christopher W. Boerger
I've gotten the bug to learn programming and have chosen Python as the
language to learn with. I've downloaded python 2.0 (MacOS) from
python.org and started printing out some of the online tutorials
available from the site. However, I've discovered while the online
tutorials are good, they pretty much cover rules and syntax and don't
get into examples, lessons or applying what was just taught into some
real-world examples. I guess I'm looking for some homework at the end
of a lesson.
So I decided to purchase a book to learn the language and get some
programming assignments (homework) as well. I've narrowed it down to
two books: Learning Python by Mark Lutz from O'Reilly and Learning To
Program Using Python: A Tutorial For Hobbyists, Self-Starters, And Those
Who Want To Learn The Art Of Programming by Alan Gauld from
Addison-Wesley.
Any thoughts, opinions, advice? My background in programming is limited
to a Pascal class in college, although I did ace the class with a 97% -
not bad for a Political Science major :^)
Thank you for your help.
Chris
--
--
Chris Boerger <cdbo...@earthlink.net>
throw_away_fish
authors - they crack me up.
Bo Vandenberg
been "Core Python Programming" by Wesley J. Chun. Its really well laid out.
Its one of the more recent books too. Published by Prentice Hall.
bo
"throw_away_fish" <throw_a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3ad95301...@news.prodigy.net...
Steve Holden
chapter. I would recommend it highly to someone in your position. Since I'm
not familiar with Gauld's book you'll have to seek comparisons from those
who are.
You should also not overlook the increasing wealth of Python material on the
web.
regards
Steve
s71...@student.gu.edu.au
>
> The O'Reilly book is phenom. Mucho-good-O. There are actually two
> authors - they crack me up.
Yes, they definatly have a wierd sense of humour. Must be Monty Python
fans as well. *grins*
From-a-Monty-Python-fan-as-well-'ly
Joal Heagney/AncientHart
Jim Hill
Christopher W. Boerger <cdbo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>I decided to purchase a book to learn the language and get some
>programming assignments (homework) as well. I've narrowed it down to
>two books: Learning Python by Mark Lutz from O'Reilly and Learning To
>Program Using Python: A Tutorial For Hobbyists, Self-Starters, And Those
>Who Want To Learn The Art Of Programming by Alan Gauld from
>Addison-Wesley.
>
>Any thoughts, opinions, advice?
I have the Lutz book and think it's an excellent ease-in to the
language. It's the one that I used to get going. I haven't seen the
Gauld book so can't compare the two.
Jim
--
jim...@swcp.com http://www.swcp.com/~jimhill/
"Let me preface my remarks by saying that I have absolutely no love
for Barry Manilow in my heart." -- Jason Lempka
Ron Stephens
few weeks, I can definitely say that the only correct solution is to buy
BOTH books ;-))
Seriously, they are both quite excellent; I find it impossible to say one is
better than the other.
If anything, the only difference I can point out is that, in my inexpert and
newbie opinion, the Learning Python O'Relliy book by Mark Lutz and David
Ascher is perhaps more advanced. On the other hand, the Learning to Program
Book by Alan Gauld goes into more basic discussion and explanation, which is
better for total newbies I think. For instance, Mr. Gault gives detailed
explanations of the basic underlying concepts involved, including code
samples from other languages as well as from Python. It is an excellent book
for someone who really needs to start from close to ground zero.
An added bonus is that many of the authors of these books are online here on
this newsgroup and on the Tutor mail list on the www.python.org site, and
freely answer newbie's questions online! I know Mr. Gault has so helped me
several times already.
What a great community!!! ;-))))
Ron Stephens
Alex Martelli
news:cdboerger-1BAD4...@nnrp02.earthlink.net...
[snip]
> Any thoughts, opinions, advice? My background in programming is limited
> to a Pascal class in college, although I did ace the class with a 97% -
> not bad for a Political Science major :^)
Lutz and Ascher are good; have a look at the sample chapter,
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/lpython/chapter/ch09.html, and
see if the style &c agrees with you.
So is Gauld; run, don't walk, to http://www.crosswinds.net/~agauld/
and you'll get a VERY good idea of what is in his book and
whether you will like it (I think you will).
Alex
chris
excellent book. I also have the Mark Lutz book but would have sorely missed
the CPP book by Chun while I have been learning the language the last
couple of months.
Good luck and enjoy yourself! I have found Python great to develop with,
Chris
Christopher W. Boerger
community is!
I've decided on a book but it wasn't any of the ones I previously
decided on :^) Upon the advice of some that responded to my post, I
checked out Core Python Programming by Wesley J. Chun. Amazon.com had a
nice page about the book and it seemed to be a perfect fit.
Ultimately, after I learn how to use Python well, I hope to create a
free astronomical ephemeris program. When I get to those inevitable
stumbling blocks this is one of the places I will seek out first.
Thank you again for all of your advice.
--
--
95% of all people surveyed believe they have above-average intelligence
Ron Stephens
program...;-))))
Jim Hill
Christopher W. Boerger <cdbo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Ultimately, after I learn how to use Python well, I hope to create a
>free astronomical ephemeris program.
Yeah, that's the usual next step for people new to Python.
Jim, who has no idea what "astronomical ephemeris" means
Jaap Spies
>
> Ultimately, after I learn how to use Python well, I hope to create a
> free astronomical ephemeris program. When I get to those inevitable
> stumbling blocks this is one of the places I will seek out first.
Yes do. I would like to see your program!
For inspiration look at: http://astrolabe.sourceforge.net/
Jaap Spies
Jaap Spies
> Yeah, that's the usual next step for people new to Python.
>
>
> Jim, who has no idea what "astronomical ephemeris" means
If you are ignorant ;-), please don't react!
Jaap Spies
Steve Holden
news:slrn9djlmo....@meldrick.swcp.com...
> In <cdboerger-855FF...@nnrp01.earthlink.net>,
> Christopher W. Boerger <cdbo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Ultimately, after I learn how to use Python well, I hope to create a
> >free astronomical ephemeris program.
>
> Yeah, that's the usual next step for people new to Python.
>
>
> Jim, who has no idea what "astronomical ephemeris" means
An ephemeris is a chart of planetary positions at certain times, used (among
other things) to construct horoscopes. Ephemerides have been used for
thousands of years, and the value of functions able to calcualte plantary
positions for arbitrary times is the avoidance of the usually-required
interpolation between tabulated positions.
Note that for astrological purposes the positions are Earth-relative, and
the Sun is considered a planet.
but-i-predict-this-won't-help-you-decide-whether-they're-useful-ly y'rs -
steve
Roy Smith
> An ephemeris is a chart of planetary positions at certain times, used (among
> other things) to construct horoscopes.
M-X Soapbox-Mode
Steve,
You do astronomy a disservice if the only example of the use of an
ephemeris you can come up with is horoscopes. That's kind of like saying
python is a cool language because you can use it to pick Zippy The Pinhead
quotes randomly out of a file.
An accurate table of planetary motion is essetial for celestial navigation
(i.e. figuring out where you are with a sextant and chronometer). Up until
WW-II, this was the ONLY way sailors (and aviators) out of sight of land
could know where they were. Polar explorers, too. Since WW-II, electronic
navigation systems have slowly reduced the importance of celestial, but it
continued to be an important skill up until the past decade or so, when GPS
really made it obsolete.
In fact, an ephermeris is really a table of positions of any body in space,
not just the planets. The GPS system itself depends on the receivers
having an accurate ephemeris of the satellite orbital positions.
We would have never put a man on the moon without an accurate ephemeris.
Nor been able to send probes to visit other planets in our solar system.
M-X Soapbox-Mode-Off
Steve Holden
> "Steve Holden" <sho...@holdenweb.com> wrote:
> > An ephemeris is a chart of planetary positions at certain times, used
(among
> > other things) to construct horoscopes.
>
> M-X Soapbox-Mode
>
> Steve,
>
> You do astronomy a disservice if the only example of the use of an
> ephemeris you can come up with is horoscopes. That's kind of like saying
> python is a cool language because you can use it to pick Zippy The Pinhead
> quotes randomly out of a file.
>
times proved itself quite ccapable of blowing its own trumpet. I am aware
that horoscopes are not the only use of ephemerides (hence my use of "(among
other things)" in my original post).
I presume you are professionally involved in astronomy. Strange how you only
climbed on your soapbox when someone mentioned astrology, an art rather than
a science, but old as astronomy, if not older. So how was your wish to
educate triggered?
This is not atypical, of course. The science of astronomy has, as a body,
attempted to discredit astrology for a long time. I won't speculate on the
reasons, which aren't important to me since I am not involved in either
activity.
> An accurate table of planetary motion is essetial for celestial navigation
> (i.e. figuring out where you are with a sextant and chronometer). Up
until
> WW-II, this was the ONLY way sailors (and aviators) out of sight of land
> could know where they were. Polar explorers, too. Since WW-II,
electronic
> navigation systems have slowly reduced the importance of celestial, but it
> continued to be an important skill up until the past decade or so, when
GPS
> really made it obsolete.
>
> In fact, an ephermeris is really a table of positions of any body in
space,
> not just the planets. The GPS system itself depends on the receivers
> having an accurate ephemeris of the satellite orbital positions.
>
I stand corrected.
> We would have never put a man on the moon without an accurate ephemeris.
> Nor been able to send probes to visit other planets in our solar system.
>
> M-X Soapbox-Mode-Off
>
I should think so, too. Just the same, ephemerides *are* used to cast
horoscopes, even though astronomers might prefer it if they weren't.
but-it-*does*-move-ly yr's - sTeVe