This is cheating a bit, because the book is history of computer science rather than computer science, but I think anyone interested in programming should read it. We often think about history of computing (and what it teaches us) in a retrospective way (we see all the amazing totally revolutionary things that happened), but it turns out that if you look deeper, there is often a lot more continuity behind key ideas (and we just think it was a revolution, because we only know a little about the actual history). This book goes into detail for a number of major developments in (early) programming and it makes you think about possible alternatives. It was one of the books that inspired me to write this essay: http://tomasp.net/blog/2016/thinking-unthinkable/
If you you work in bioinformatics it is weird how little history the average bioinformatician knows (the field only really dates back to the late 1960s). People may know things like PAM matrices, but not Margaret Dayhoff who created them (not to mention the standard amino acid codes used today).
This is cheating a bit, because the book is history of computer science rather than computer science, but I think anyone interested in programming should read it. We often think about history of computing (and what it teaches us) in a retrospective way (we see all the amazing totally revolutionary things that happened), but it turns out that if you look deeper, there is often a lot more continuity behind key ideas (and we just think it was a revolution, because we only know a little about the actual history). This book goes into detail for a number of major developments in (early) programming and it makes you think about possible alternatives. It was one of the books that inspired me to write this essay: http://tomasp.net/blog/2016/thinking-unthinkable/