I think you might be onto something. I hadn't realise how subtle MS
have been to use Pathology as an educational technique.

Pathology (from Greek pathos, feeling, pain, suffering; and logos,
study of; see also -ology) is the study of the processes underlying
disease and other forms of illness, harmful abnormality, or dysfunction.

Yes, it all fits!

S.

On 1 Feb 2006, at 12:07, nat_pryce wrote:
> --- In postmodernprogramming@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Freeman
> <steve@m...> wrote:
>>
>> On 1 Feb 2006, at 10:34, Keith Braithwaite wrote:
>>> fantastic notion to me. Which raises the question: how would you go
>>> about learning a language like a post-modernist?
>>
>> The way most people do... Skim through enough of the book/tutorial to
>> figure out the basics of the syntax and to get something to run. Then
>> copy and paste an example from the web/MSDN that mostly does what you
>> need. Rinse and repeat.
>
> And don't underestimate the utility of refactoring tools in helping
> people learn from examples.
>
> I used to hate the Microsoft example code found in MSDN and the SDKs.
> It's all poorly written. Most of it serves to hide the point of the
> specific example. The MSDN is a virtual textbook in how *not* to
> program.
>
> But I now realise that I had completely missed the point of those
> examples.
>
> When armed with ReSharper, Microsoft's example code is a fantastic way
> to learn. Start with something virtually unintelligable and then
> refactor your way to clarity. Rename variables to discover intent,
> delete unnecessary code, pull out methods and classes to describe what
> you learn as you decipher the code.
>
> In the end you have a much deeper understanding of the API in question
> and a clear expression of your understanding in code.
>
> What I find surprising is that Microsoft's MSDN team invented a method
> of teaching that relies upon tools that Microsoft themselves are
> unable to implement.
>