I have not yet read TAOUP but take the comparison as a compliment. Thanks! (I do have it on my wishlist, but my spare time is precious for its rarity.) My goal is very much to bring more attention to the why’s of programming. Personally, in my own work, I draw on books like The Practice of Programming and The Pragmatic Programmer. Hopefully my discussions can go beyond what any book can cover, sharing living insights from daily work and vocation.
I am increasingly irked by stories of how badly academia is botching the utility of OO. Sure, if you want to be all theoretical, all the time, you can just write Simular 67 programs to contemplate your own navel. OO is just another tool, not some mystifying force to be worshipped and not actually grappled with on a practical level. Lessons on OO should be focused on how it helps programmers solve problems better than they would be able to do so without it. If professors built curricula with that one rule in mind, well, I think your experience might be different.
I’ll reserve a topic just for OO, some time after testing and re-factoring. I’ll have plenty to say about C++ and it’s thinly disguised derivative, C#. 😉