>>12709697this is an overreaction, but at the same time I get it. When you have idiots like
>>12710082 who treat it as a comprehensive study of CS when it's a great introduction that only graces over basic CS, it's easy to get bitter. I love SICP but fuck it's definitely not the best computer science book ever written.
For algo, Sedgewick/Flajolet and Knuth's books are do way better jobs at going in depth.
For compilers, the standard types book and engineering a compiler are great.
This isn't to say SICP isn't good. It *does* a great job casually introducing these topics in a natural setting, but it's not the end-all be-all of CS education.
