Computing desk
< December 2	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 4 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 3

Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming, is there a planned successor?

Looking at The Art of Computer Programming, specifically the number of planned items, their frequency, and Professor Knuth's age, is there talk of who will see these distant volumes through if Knuth turns out not to be a supercentennarian? 131.131.64.210 (talk) 18:07, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure the publishers will ensure someone takes over, but it won't be "Knuth." The distinction is that Knuth is rather facetious. It makes for an easier read when handling technically complex topics. There are many people who know a hell of a lot more about programming, but they write very boring descriptions of their work (and they tend to be very conceited). I have to review a lot of books and I've written many chapters for programming textbooks. It won't be an easy task. I know that what I write and what is published under my name are two very very different things. Any hint of humor or insult are removed by the editors and all that is left is the most boring text imaginable. What I'd like to know is how Knuth got permission to write the way he does. 209.149.113.52 (talk) 20:03, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Knuth started early and became so famous that he can pick publishers. Also, I'd say academic publishers in general are more prone to let their authors' style shine through than technical publishers - after all, many academic books are also called monographs, typically by an established authority, while for technical books, publishers may want to project a "professional" image. I don't think the statement "there are many people who know a hell of a lot more about programming" is useful - it may well be correct on some technical level, as in "they know he details of C11 pragmas" or "they know the ins and outs of the MS windows multimedia API". But I don't think that there are very many people that know a lot more about algorithms than Knuth. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 11:44, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if C, L, R, or S would contribute to future fascicles of TAOCP. 131.131.64.210 (talk) 15:55, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Riddle me this? Or that for an alternative "S" who was a student of Knuth? My copy of ItA has only 3 authors - that may date me ;-) --Stephan Schulz (talk) 16:07, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Silberschatz is another S with an enjoyable writing style, but his specialty is more database and operating systems :) 131.131.64.210 (talk) 17:12, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've used both Tanenbaum's and Silbershatz's Operating Systems books for classes I've taught. I've found that the students prefer Tanenbaum, but the universities appear to require Silbershatz more often. So, we now have C, L, R, S, and T. 209.149.113.52 (talk) 18:46, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't heard of Tanenbaum (I'm not really much of a computer scientist, but I like to learn), so now I'll most likely get a used copy of his book on Amazon. Thanks for mentioning him! I liked Algorithms + Data Structures = Programs, but without looking it up, Wirth must be at least as old, if not older, than Knuth. 131.131.64.210 (talk) 18:59, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

with looking it up, yes, by four years. —Tamfang (talk) 08:16, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Google book page images

Today I lost the ability of seeing Google book page images. It has been working properly before. I think it may have something to do with a Norton setting, but I don't have a clue which. Maybe I can unclick something? This is what it looks like for pages images = just blank. --Doug Coldwell (talk)

I can confirm that it's not just you - Google Books is OK for me in Chrome and Firefox, but not IE. (The highlighting hasn't been working in IE for some time, incidentally, it now seems to have given up altogether). Tevildo (talk) 23:35, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. Great to hear I didn't screw up something myself by clicking a wrong button. Probably in time then it will get solved for IE? --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:50, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Doug Coldwell You have probably tried all these things but just in case here are the steps that I've found fix a lot of Internet related problems: 1) Clear the cache in your browser. (this may slow down performance a little for a while but it shouldn't be major) 2) Quit the browser. 3) Shut down the computer 4) Shut down the router. Then Restart the router and then the computer and then the browser. (These are sort of the IT equivalent of "take two aspirin and call me in the morning") --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:29, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't think of the # 4 procedure - maybe that will do the trick (hopefully). Didn't want to upgrade to Chrome - makes me nervous to do ANY upgrades. Thanks for hints. I'll try the Bayer trick. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:40, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MadScientistX11 Thanks for ideas. So far, no good luck = 2 PCs both with I.E. Windows 8. Even tried on another Router -> that has always worked before correctly on Google Books (just weaker signal strength). With Home Router that I now use I have 5 bars strength. Starting to think maybe IT IS IN FACT something to do with I.E. - I'll email Bill Gates and maybe he can take care of it for me. BTW, everything else works correctly - and as you can see I am a fairly active editor and like to do DYKs.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:08, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like perhaps I should upgrade to Firefox? I have newer Toshiba PCs and they should handle it O.K.??--Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:43, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I upgraded to Firefox = problem solved. Thanks! --Doug Coldwell (talk) 16:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]