Re: Python (was Re: I did not inhale)

On 21/08/2024 17:37, John Ames wrote:

Yes, books can be wrong, and yes, community fora can have valuable
information - but there really is no substitute for a good manual, in
print or otherwise. StackOverflow is very useful for clearing up some
kinds of esoteric-yet-common questions, but if you just need to double-
check what the legal values for parameter X in function Y are, it's
much quicker (and usually less error-prone) to turn to a reference
guide than it is to go poking around looking for records of times in
history where someone else might've had the same question.
 (Doubly so, now that Google is as friggin' useless as it's gotten the
last few years.)
 

I do like a good manual, whether it be a physical book or an online manual.  So I am not objecting to reading them, learning from them, or using them as references.
I am just objecting to the concept that reading particular books is somehow "required" in order to write "useful C" or "program for Linux". They are neither necessary nor sufficient, especially when picking one or two particular books.