54 books
—
6 voters
Programming Languages Books
Showing 1-50 of 703

by (shelved 29 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.44 鈥� 11,143 ratings 鈥� published 1978

by (shelved 15 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.23 鈥� 8,647 ratings 鈥� published 2008

by (shelved 14 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.43 鈥� 1,729 ratings 鈥� published 2015

by (shelved 13 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.50 鈥� 1,699 ratings 鈥� published

by (shelved 13 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.96 鈥� 1,681 ratings 鈥� published 2010

by (shelved 12 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.30 鈥� 2,367 ratings 鈥� published 2011

by (shelved 12 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.28 鈥� 579 ratings 鈥� published 2002

by (shelved 11 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.10 鈥� 4,011 ratings 鈥� published 1986

by (shelved 9 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.71 鈥� 402 ratings 鈥� published 2021

by (shelved 9 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.56 鈥� 1,544 ratings 鈥� published 2014

by (shelved 8 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.15 鈥� 3,170 ratings 鈥� published 2010

by (shelved 7 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.47 鈥� 4,811 ratings 鈥� published 1984

by (shelved 7 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.35 鈥� 2,529 ratings 鈥� published 2015

by (shelved 7 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.12 鈥� 1,651 ratings 鈥� published

by (shelved 7 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.51 鈥� 8,006 ratings 鈥� published 2001

by (shelved 7 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.10 鈥� 3,004 ratings 鈥� published 1986

by (shelved 7 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.29 鈥� 1,976 ratings 鈥� published 1974

by (shelved 7 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.01 鈥� 3,178 ratings 鈥� published 2013

by (shelved 6 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.30 鈥� 1,053 ratings 鈥� published 2013

by (shelved 6 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.87 鈥� 62 ratings 鈥� published 2012

by (shelved 6 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.94 鈥� 942 ratings 鈥� published 2008

by (shelved 6 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.97 鈥� 148 ratings 鈥� published 1992

by (shelved 6 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.40 鈥� 3,337 ratings 鈥� published 1991

by (shelved 6 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.07 鈥� 3,373 ratings 鈥� published 1996

by (shelved 5 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.36 鈥� 2,964 ratings 鈥� published 2015

by (shelved 5 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.35 鈥� 410 ratings 鈥� published 1996

by (shelved 5 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.22 鈥� 985 ratings 鈥� published 1989

by (shelved 5 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.60 鈥� 85 ratings 鈥� published 2014

by (shelved 5 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.67 鈥� 33 ratings 鈥� published 1993

by (shelved 5 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.78 鈥� 354 ratings 鈥� published 2012

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.52 鈥� 286 ratings 鈥� published 2021

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.02 鈥� 749 ratings 鈥� published 2007

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.63 鈥� 565 ratings 鈥� published 2015

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.33 鈥� 1,069 ratings 鈥� published 1995

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.18 鈥� 310 ratings 鈥� published 1984

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.99 鈥� 354 ratings 鈥� published 1997

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.22 鈥� 1,660 ratings 鈥� published 2008

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.30 鈥� 479 ratings 鈥� published 1993

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.15 鈥� 463 ratings 鈥� published 2011

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.18 鈥� 958 ratings 鈥� published 2010

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.96 鈥� 1,295 ratings 鈥� published 2014

by (shelved 4 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.15 鈥� 787 ratings 鈥� published 2005

by (shelved 3 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.28 鈥� 3,082 ratings 鈥� published 2014

by (shelved 3 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.62 鈥� 1,709 ratings 鈥� published 2015

by (shelved 3 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.71 鈥� 282 ratings 鈥� published 2016

by (shelved 3 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.25 鈥� 338 ratings 鈥� published

by (shelved 3 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.85 鈥� 93 ratings 鈥� published

by (shelved 3 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.15 鈥� 177 ratings 鈥� published 2013

by (shelved 3 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 3.96 鈥� 408 ratings 鈥� published 2001

by (shelved 3 times as programming-languages)
avg rating 4.55 鈥� 1,873 ratings 鈥� published 2014
欧宝娱乐 is hiring!

“In languages with a garbage collector (GC), the GC keeps track and cleans up memory that isn鈥檛 being used anymore, and we don鈥檛 need to think about it. Without a GC, it鈥檚 our responsibility to identify when memory is no longer being used and call code to explicitly return it, just as we did to request it. Doing this correctly has historically been a difficult programming problem. If we forget, we鈥檒l waste memory. If we do it too early, we鈥檒l have an invalid variable. If we do it twice, that鈥檚 a bug too. We need to pair exactly one allocate with exactly one free.
Rust takes a different path: the memory is automatically returned once the variable that owns it goes out of scope.”
― The Rust Programming Language
Rust takes a different path: the memory is automatically returned once the variable that owns it goes out of scope.”
― The Rust Programming Language

“Rust鈥檚 central feature is ownership. Although the feature is straightforward to explain, it has deep implications for the rest of the language.
All programs have to manage the way they use a computer鈥檚 memory while running. Some languages have garbage collection that constantly looks for no longer used memory as the program runs; in other languages, the programmer must explicitly allocate and free the memory. Rust uses a third approach: memory is managed through a system of ownership with a set of rules that the compiler checks at compile time. None of the ownership features slow down your program while it鈥檚 running.”
― The Rust Programming Language
All programs have to manage the way they use a computer鈥檚 memory while running. Some languages have garbage collection that constantly looks for no longer used memory as the program runs; in other languages, the programmer must explicitly allocate and free the memory. Rust uses a third approach: memory is managed through a system of ownership with a set of rules that the compiler checks at compile time. None of the ownership features slow down your program while it鈥檚 running.”
― The Rust Programming Language