Talk:Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs

Skip to table of contents

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Untitled[edit]

Have you read your SICP today? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DarklyCute (talk • contribs) 01:16, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

>>>/g/ -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 17:16, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Influenced[edit]

What's this book's relation to the Little Schemer? --maru (talk) contribs 01:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Little Schemer (and it's forerunner The Little LISPer) has it's own style and wasn't inspired by SICP's style, at least not in the same way the other books mentioned were. Chiok 17:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With Julie Sussman?[edit]

Why the phrase "with Julie Sussman"? Is she regarded a contributor, rather than a full coauthor? Qwertyus 21:36, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, she's not listed as an author on the textbook, but she is an author on the teacher's supplement. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 17:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is not listed where? On the book [1] it says "Harold Abelson and Gerald Jay Sussman with Julie Sussman" and in the Library of Congress Online Catalog MARC tags the main author field is "Abelson, Harold." and there are additional fields for both "Sussman, Gerald Jay." and "Sussman, Julie." --TuukkaH 17:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right - the cover actually does say "with Julie Sussman". Hadn't noticed that. I guess that's what you were asking about in the first place. I don't know what the distinction is, but it certainly implies that Julie isn't a "full coauthor" on it. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 18:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Funny: Sussman's other book, Structure and Interpretation of Classical Mechanics, is written by Gerald Jay Sussman and Jack Wisdom, with Meinhard E. Mayer. Qwertyus 19:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The ideas and the general structure of the book came from the course developed by Hal and Gerry, who are professors at MIT. Julie, who is both a computer programmer and a professional writer, edited the book and made quite significant contributions to its ultimate content, in addition to writing the Instructor's Manual. Briankharvey (talk) 06:54, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Structure and interpretation of computer programs.jpg[edit]

Image:Structure and interpretation of computer programs.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

— Save_Us_229 00:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation page[edit]

I'd like to suggest redirecting "SICP" here by default. "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" is a much more popular expansion of "SICP" than "St. Ignatius College Prep". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.250.11.175 (talk) 09:06, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It should at least be on the disambiguation page. I tried searching for this page just typing SCIP on the search bar and not finding the link to my surprise PuercoPop (talk) 09:07, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. How is such a decision made? SICP should point directly to this page, with a "for other uses..." pointing to the disambiguation page. Briankharvey (talk) 06:55, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done, as of this edit (SICP), note added in this edit (Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs).

—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 02:50, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Prerequisites?[edit]

SICP is noted for assuming a high level of mathematical knowledge (e.g. "The Structure and Interpretation of the Computer Science Curriculum") as would be appropriate for an MIT engineering student but not for an average reader or US college freshman. What were the prerequisites for 6.001? Is it worth noting this in the article? 75.15.139.252 (talk) 21:08, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

6.001 was a freshman course with no prerequisites. (Of course, MIT does have freshman year requirements, so in practice most took calculus in high school, and the others took it at the same time as 001.) At Berkeley, during the dot-com bubble we actually enforced what was always listed as a prerequisite: programming experience that includes recursion. Students with no prior experience took another (also Scheme-based) course before the SICP course. Briankharvey (talk) 07:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone add a picture?[edit]

I'm not sure what fair use is, so i don't want to do it myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.1.194 (talk) 09:04, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CC license?[edit]

The home page of SICP says the book is licensed under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported, but the second page of the HTML version of the book says it's licensed under the CC BY-NC 3.0 Unported. So what's the real license of the book? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.244.229.19 (talk) 11:02, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that different versions of this book are licensed by different licenses. If you are concerned for legal reasons. consult the publisher. — Lentower (talk) 02:45, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding section "JavaScript Adaptation"[edit]

I feel that it's significant info for the reader that SICP has been adapted to JavaScript, so I've added a section on it. I've kept the info as terse as possible, to match the style of the rest of the SICP article. Here is the announcement of the first public release of SICP JS: https://sicp.comp.nus.edu.sg/announcement.html

I'd love to hear any opinions on this addition to the SICP article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinhenz (talk • contribs) 10:08, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, JavaScript Adaptation into Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs[edit]

just a variant edition of a textbook DGG ( talk ) 02:12, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Each article meets WP:N. If you read each of the books, you see there are substantial differences beyond changing the language used to teach the concepts, made by the adapters. — Lentower (talk) 21:49, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Regarding the request to merge this article with the article on Source: Programming languages are widely discussed and mentioned. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_programming_languages and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_programming_languages_by_type It would be odd to link those references to a section of an article about the book. So I suggest that we keep the separate page for Source. -- this Oppose is by Martinhenz. Copied from the merge discussion at Talk:Structure_and_Interpretation_of_Computer_Programs,_JavaScript_Adaptation#Merge_request. — Lentower (talk) 14:04, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]