Some tasks are not present in lectures

The course highlighted just how much convenience you take for granted with a higher level language like Python, and just how clever those original C programmers were. I loved the style of their writing. I nearly gave the course 4 stars because of a few curly assignments where the autograder was getting different results to other C compilers, but I couldn't do it to Dr Chuck ;-) The course is well worth your time.

Well,i ll learned lot of things by coursera I ll learned clearly c programming in a coursera platform

Dr Chuck is an amazing lecturer, and give a decent time to complete the activities

The last task was crazy but overall, the best content out there on C;

Concise and easy to follow. Ideal teaching style!

Thank You So Much.

Good Start

dfdf

I like Chuck's teaching philosophy in this first course. Ie, putting the students at the time when C and unix were just created. Apparently Chuck has put lots of efforts in this course. My only complaint is that he might add some materials about creating the local environment for students to write and compile C. After all, the online environment for exercises are very basic and a little bit slow.

Aside from a bad assignment in Module 2, this course was excellent!

This course is good for newly to C

Quite a Good course for begineers

good

i feel very lost and I couldn't finish the Exercise RS-7: Compute Minimum and Maximum , lose of guidaince and the AI was not helpful neither the course I feel like this is so complicated for everyone! I still in college btw and 17 yo but still very hard

The content in this course is sound, but the teaching does not carry its weight, and the gap between the videos and the graded exercises is the main problem. The assignments routinely require functions that are never introduced in the lectures. Exercise RS-7 is the clearest case: it instructs you to use gets() and atoi(), neither of which appears anywhere in the Rosetta Stone lecture, and neither of which is covered in the assigned K&R chapter 1 reading. atoi is introduced in K&R 2.7, strcmp in 5.5, gets only in Appendix B. So a learner following the course in order has no basis for the exercise beyond guessing or searching independently. That is not desirable difficulty, it is a sequencing error. The autograder compounds this. It appears to check for specific function names in the source rather than evaluating program behaviour. A logically correct solution using fgets and a character comparison was rejected with messages about middle-tested loops and EOF, without any indication of what the checker actually wanted. Several rounds of trial and error were needed to reverse-engineer the required shape of the code. Feedback that names the missing construct would fix this immediately. On the videos themselves: they are largely commentary on the book's examples rather than independent instruction, and the pointer and structure modules in particular allocate very little video time to the hardest material in the course. K&R explains the same concepts more concisely and more completely. Which raises the obvious question, if the readings are the book, the exercises are the book, and the videos add little beyond narration, what does the course provide that reading K&R directly does not? The autograded exercises are genuinely the strongest part of this course and are worth keeping. But they need either lectures that actually teach the functions they require, or explicit pointers to the specific K&R sections that do. As it stands the course asks learners to use tools it has not handed them.