Are all versions of Elements of Programming Interviews created equal?

Saw this from some Amazon reviews of the Python version of EPI: > The coding style in many cases is just... bad. The authors often use wonky Python tricks at the cost of readability and simplicity. For example, their definition of a BST search is a *one-line* nested ternary conditional (chapter 14, page 202). I sanity-checked with a friend who does interviews, and he said he would DOCK points for style if a candidate tried to pull something like that. In addition, the explanations in many sections are just confusingly worded. And sometimes, the presented solution is completely unintuitive or badly styled - like using global variables instead of passing parameters. > The authors mention that the code solutions are "Pythonic". However, this is not the case. In fact a lot of the code in this book seems to be written by someone who doesn't seem to grasp pedagogy. See the solution for string to int: def string_to_int(s): return functools.reduce(lamba running_sum, c: running_sum * 10 + string.digits.index(c), s[s[0]] == '-', 0) * (-1 if s[0] == '-' else 1) Are you kidding me? How is this solution even remotely pedagogical, or even an acceptable solution in a coding interview? --- That sounds pretty bad. Are the Java or C++ versions any better? I'm hoping at least the C++ one is since it's OG. If not then might as well skip EPI and focus on LC.