This comment is not ment to be negative, just some insight that might be valuable.
I read the free chapter. One thing I noticed right away was that I think some things can be hard for people with not so much knowledge about the topic: under each headline, it explains a concept from the ground up, no knowledge required. Like "the syntax of a language is...". But just a few sentences in, advanced topics are touched, like assembly instructions, not explained. It feels a bit like "the curse of knowledge", where it's hard to know what the other party knows. But if the reader needs to learn what syntax means, they will probably not understand the next sentences.
So, I think more consistency could improve the product.
This is of course just my meaning and interpretation of the text, it might not be relevant. But maybe something to have in mind for your next masterpiece :)
> under each headline, it explains a concept from the ground up, no knowledge required. Like "the syntax of a language is...". But just a few sentences in, advanced topics are touched, like assembly instructions, not explained.
As the blurb of the book states: no prior knowledge in the field of compiler construction is required, but the reader should be familiar with at least one procedural language and one assembly language. So I thought it would be OK to assume that the reader knows about things like assembly instructions.
Then the appendix of the book has a short introduction to Z80 assembly (which still assumes that you know the basics of assembly language).
Every books starts somewhere. It would be hard to write a compiler construction book and assuming zero knowledge about computer programming.
I am not saying that the curse of knowledge is not a thing, though, so I will definitely keep this in mind!
I read the free chapter. One thing I noticed right away was that I think some things can be hard for people with not so much knowledge about the topic: under each headline, it explains a concept from the ground up, no knowledge required. Like "the syntax of a language is...". But just a few sentences in, advanced topics are touched, like assembly instructions, not explained. It feels a bit like "the curse of knowledge", where it's hard to know what the other party knows. But if the reader needs to learn what syntax means, they will probably not understand the next sentences.
So, I think more consistency could improve the product.
This is of course just my meaning and interpretation of the text, it might not be relevant. But maybe something to have in mind for your next masterpiece :)