tomten (19) [Avatar] Offline
#1
Will you run the book through the Word 2007 grammar/spelling checker? If you will, then there's no point in anyone reposting the resulting suggestions here, right?

The reason I'm asking is that I just did, and at a quick glance found several grammar/spelling suggestions with which I concurred. All of them trivial, but still.

Also, which should come as no surprise judging by the other sandbox reviews, this is easily the best introduction to .NET 3.5 in general and C# 3 in particular I've seen. I'm reading it myself mostly as a way to ensure I haven't missed anything while getting to know .NET 3.5, and I find it an excellent book also for this purpose. I have little doubt I'll be recommending the e-book once it's out, in case everyone I know hasn't learned it all come spring...

EDIT: If pasting the text into Word is a violation of the e-book license, then the above happened to a friend of mine, not me.

Message was edited by:
the oops police
jon.skeet (448) [Avatar] Offline
#2
Re: Will you run the book through the Word 2007 grammar/spelling checker?
> Will you run the book through the Word 2007
> grammar/spelling checker? If you will, then there's
> no point in anyone reposting the resulting
> suggestions here, right?

Better than that, I'll run it through a copy editor smilie

Sometimes Word is a bit overzealous, I find - although I do tend to at least look at its suggestions.

> The reason I'm asking is that I just did, and at a
> quick glance found several grammar/spelling
> suggestions with which I concurred. All of them
> trivial, but still.

Some of them may be UK/US differences. One that has been mentioned before (and I've been trying hard to fix) is the difference between: "Microsoft are doing XYZ" and "Microsoft is doing XYZ".

There were also quite a few typos etc which have been fixed in the manuscript, but which may well not have made it into the MEAP edition.

> Also, which should come as no surprise judging by the
> other sandbox reviews, this is easily the best
> introduction to .NET 3.5 in general and C# 3 in
> particular I've seen. I'm reading it myself mostly as
> a way to ensure I haven't missed anything while
> getting to know .NET 3.5, and I find it an excellent
> book also for this purpose. I have little doubt I'll
> be recommending the e-book once it's out, in case
> everyone I know hasn't learned it all come spring...

That's fabulous to hear, thanks very much smilie

I should point out that it's not really trying to explore all of .NET 3.5 - in particular the coverage of the various LINQ providers is light at best, attempting to provide an "overall feel" rather than details. I also don't look into the new BCL features (ReaderWriterLockSlim, DateTimeOffset etc) at all, because that's not the focus of the book. We considered including a chapter about the new features of .NET 3.5, but felt it would stick out a bit.

I do hope it covers C# 3 in rather more depth than over reading materials, however. That was certainly the aim - although it's hard to compare with the competition when a lot of it isn't out yet!

> EDIT: If pasting the text into Word is a violation of
> the e-book license, then the above happened to a
> friend of mine, not me.

If it *is* a violation, it's certainly not one that I personally mind smilie

Jon
tomten (19) [Avatar] Offline
#3
Re: Will you run the book through the Word 2007 grammar/spelling checker?
> Some of them may be UK/US differences.

The first was actually a comma-vs-semicolon issue: "sometimes x, sometimes y". But your copy editor will certainly find this, or you should sack them. Which reminds me; I found at least one use of "singular they", but it was obvious from the wording that you had given the political dimension of the issue some thought. So I bet said copy editor will like that one. =]

> I also don't look into the new BCL features

Good, save that for your ".NET 3.5 in Depth" book (due winter 200smilie.
jon.skeet (448) [Avatar] Offline
#4
Re: Will you run the book through the Word 2007 grammar/spelling checker?
> > Some of them may be UK/US differences.
>
> The first was actually a comma-vs-semicolon issue:
> "sometimes x, sometimes y". But your copy editor will
> certainly find this, or you should sack them. Which
> reminds me; I found at least one use of "singular
> they", but it was obvious from the wording that you
> had given the political dimension of the issue some
> thought. So I bet said copy editor will like that
> one. =]

It won't be too long until I find out. I can't say I'm eagerly anticipating the copy edit phase, but at least it means that final production is in sight...

> > I also don't look into the new BCL features
>
> Good, save that for your ".NET 3.5 in Depth" book
> (due winter 200smilie.

Funnily enough, I've toyed around with the idea of "core ideas in depth" as a book. Something covering stuff like:

o Strings (encodings etc)
o Numeric types (floating point issues etc)
o Internationalization
o Threading
o Reflection (and assembly resolution etc)
o AppDomains
o Dates and times (timezones etc)
o Optimization and profiling
o Collections

(Actually, to do all of those in depth would take a *lot* of paper - I'd have to think about releasing a "Volume 1", "Volume 2" etc)

It would cover all of those from .NET 1 upwards, and I personally think it would be useful - but I don't think it would sell well. You see, the kind of person who realises there's more to strings than meets the eye (e.g. surrogate pairs) is likely to either know it all already, or know where to find the information. It's the kind of person who really *should* read such a book who doesn't realise it!

But aside from anything else, I definitely need a rest after finishing this book! (There's a certain amount of code still to write for Snippy, and plenty of web site work to do too...)

Jon
tomten (19) [Avatar] Offline
#5
Re: Will you run the book through the Word 2007 grammar/spelling checker?
> I personally think it would be useful - but I don't think it would sell well

For something that would satisfy both criteria, how about "10 things you are doing wrong with .NET"? Collect all the favorite pet peeves from the c# newsgroup and explain why they matter. Like

o "You are using asynchrony in only some parts of an operation, as opposed to all parts, making the asynchrony practically meaningless"
o "You are creating non-streamed behavior around streams, creating bizarre scenarios where streams are immediately fully consumed and disposed instead of actually streamed"
o "You are ignoring the potential pitfalls concering concurrency and multi-threading just because everything works fine in the debugger on your single-CPU machine"
o "You are constantly ignoring the fact that strings need a known encoding to be converted to and from bits" with the follow-up chapter "Your license to use Encoding.Default has been permanently revoked"

Perfect Christmas present for lazy colleagues/employees who code like it's 1999! Just send your last 1000 newsgroup posts to your copy editor, and the book will write itself.