Book on C++11.

[Srinivas Nayak]

Hi,

Is there a book on C++11 ?

2nd edition of "Thinking in c++" was published on 2000.
Is there any new edition of this book coming in near future with C++11?

Sincerely,
Srinivas

 

[jjtf]

Hi,

Is there a book on C++11 ?

2nd edition of "Thinking in c++" was published on 2000.
Is there any new edition of this book coming in near future with C++11?

Sincerely,
Srinivas

I have a related question.

Should I bother learning c++ 11 if I'm learning C++ to get in to the programming
field. Will big C++ 03 projects continue to hire or is C++11 suddenly in demand?

I'm considering just picking up the books in the FAQ because they're cheap and effective, despite being outdated by the new standard.

 

[Pavel]

I have a related question.

Should I bother learning c++ 11 if I'm learning C++ to get in to the programming
field.
Will big C++ 03 projects continue to hire or is C++11 suddenly in demand?

The answer probably most depends on your timing for entering the market. Right
now, a mid-to-big size company I work for does not use C++11 or asks
C++11-specific questions at the interviews. You would not miss a point saying
you have not had a chance to work in C++11. Some awareness about useful C++11
features (just being able to legibly explain what's good about them) might be a
(really small) "plus".

I speculate this will stay so for a couple of years; then this might start
gradually change. Smaller companies may start using C++11 faster. The keyword
here is "start": tons of 1998- and 2003- compliant code are probably bound to be
written for many years and to stay around and to be maintained for decades.

I'm considering just picking up the books in the FAQ because they're cheap and effective, despite being outdated by the new standard.

What I pay most attention to are the focus, software design, problem solving and
practical coding skills and common sense. I bet you won't waste your time
concentrating on these instead of syntactic peculiarities you have never used --
just be honest and upfront about it during your interviews.

For the books, apart from generally solid FAQ recommendations, "Thinking in..."
should be just fine; for something more C++-ish and modern (not yet 11-ish), try
"Modern C++ Design" by Andrei Alecsandrescu -- just do not jump into applying
Loki to all seemingly appropriate problems without giving it a good second (or
third) thought.

Also, IMHO reading an important piece of source code (e.g. that of a modern
version of C++ Standard Library) can be more instructive than reading a good book.

-HTH
Pavel

 

[Jorgen Grahn]

jjtf wrote: ....

The answer probably most depends on your timing for entering the market. Right
now, a mid-to-big size company I work for does not use C++11 or asks
C++11-specific questions at the interviews. You would not miss a point saying
you have not had a chance to work in C++11. Some awareness about useful C++11
features (just being able to legibly explain what's good about them) might be a
(really small) "plus".

I'd think it would be a real plus, but only because it shows you're
keeping up with what's happening. On the other hand lots of people are
doing that -- C++11 got lots of media attention.

What I pay most attention to are the focus, software design, problem solving and
practical coding skills and common sense. I bet you won't waste your time
concentrating on these instead of syntactic peculiarities you have never used --
just be honest and upfront about it during your interviews.

Good advice.

....

Also, IMHO reading an important piece of source code (e.g. that of a modern
version of C++ Standard Library) can be more instructive than reading a good book.

You need to do both. Not sure reading the STL is the best thing you
can do though -- general-purpose libraries are very unlike the code
you'll spend most of your time reading and writing.

/Jorgen

 

[Pavel]

I'd think it would be a real plus, but only because it shows you're
keeping up with what's happening. On the other hand lots of people are
doing that -- C++11 got lots of media attention.


Good advice.

...

You need to do both. Not sure reading the STL is the best thing you
can do though -- general-purpose libraries are very unlike the code
you'll spend most of your time reading and writing.

Yes, the domain one will work for will probably be different but this does not
make this code less instructive. In my experience, the source code of STL in
particular is one of the best exposures of non-obvious issues one would face to
efficiently implement seemingly straightforward specifications in C++.

STL API is relatively simple but an efficient implementation uses many more
standard C++ features and implementation-specific extensions than typical
small-scale STL client code (let alone a collection of examples). Carefully
studying why this or that feature was used helps understand why those more
complex features were defined as they were and where they were either
insufficient or inconvenient enough for the library author to use extensions. A
modern version may also give an idea how new C++11 features can be useful (e.g.
see usage of GNU __alignof__ extension in GNU STL that can be replaced by the
standard alignof operator in C++11).

The added advantage of reading STL code is deeper understanding STL specs. The
reader would probably have some initial idea and, as s/he oceeds, s/he will
learn the details s/he will apply when using STL later and get an idea why the
specs are what they are.

/Jorgen

-Pavel

 

[Jorgen Grahn]

Yes, the domain one will work for will probably be different but this does not
make this code less instructive. In my experience, the source code of STL in
particular is one of the best exposures of non-obvious issues one would face to
efficiently implement seemingly straightforward specifications in C++.

I agree reading it is useful. But you don't get this from it: the
mapping from a concrete typical real-world problem into a (probably
object-oriented) design, and the mapping of that into C++ code.

STL *does* solve a real-world problem, but an unusual one: to provide
efficient general-purpose containers and algorithms which will suit
almost all needs.

/Jorgen

 

[Pavel]

I agree reading it is useful. But you don't get this from it: the
mapping from a concrete typical real-world problem into a (probably
object-oriented) design, and the mapping of that into C++ code.

Oh, yes, I most certainly agree STL does not provide much insights to
OOA&D-in-C++. Some other Standard C++ Library facilities, like streambuf
hierarchy, do more of it -- but I am far from calling streambuf a good OOA&D
example.

IMO the main benefit from Standard Library code reading is learning the language
features and their application to low-level problems rather than developing
one's design-at-large skills. STL, however, provides an example of good design
as an additional benefit even though it does not use many OO techniques. I have
to admit I don't really know whether STL is technically OO or not: on one hand,
it has classes and achieves main goals of a good OO design, such as loose
coupling and high cohesion; on the other, it does not use virtual functions,
is-a type of inheritance etc. I am not crazy about pigeon-holing so I won't lose
my sleep about this question.

STL *does* solve a real-world problem, but an unusual one: to provide
efficient general-purpose containers and algorithms which will suit
almost all needs.

/Jorgen

-Pavel

 

[Rui Maciel]

I have a related question.

Should I bother learning c++ 11 if I'm learning C++ to get in to the
programming field. Will big C++ 03 projects continue to hire or is C++11
suddenly in demand?

It should be pointed out that C++11 is essentially a superset of C++03.
This means that learning C++11 is essentially the same thing as learning
C++03 along with a number of additional features. So, there is no reason to
place yourself in a spot where you believe you should pick one or the other.

In practical terms, it's probably a good idea to focus on C++03, simply
because it's something that you need to do anyway (being a subset of C++11),
and as it is expected that it will take some time before C++11-compliant
compilers have become widely adopted.

In addition, there is obviously more software out there that doesn't use
C++11 features than the one that does.

Nevertheless, some C++11 features are terribly easy to pick up, and some
were even already available through non-standard components. This means
that there is essentially no excuse to avoid learning them. For example,
range-based for loops, nullptr and using >> in nested templates definitions
are picked up without any problem, as is using override and final in member
function declarations. Even if you don't use C++11's std::tuple and
std::array, there is always boost's version.

So, in short, although it might be preferable to focus for now on C++11's
C++03 subset, you are doing yourself a disservice if you intentionally avoid
getting acquainted with the C++11 goodies.


Rui Maciel

 

[Rui Maciel]

Also, IMHO reading an important piece of source code (e.g. that of a
modern version of C++ Standard Library) can be more instructive than
reading a good book.

That really depends on the source code and the reader's background. For
example, if a reader isn't acquainted with design patterns then, when
reading source code where design patterns are implemented, some details will
either appear terribly convoluted or even won't even be noticed at all. And
let's not even talk about template metaprogramming. Some of the stuff out
there, even the basic stuff, tends to be a bit mind-blowing if a reader
doesn't know what he is looking at.


Rui Maciel

 

[Pavel]

That really depends on the source code and the reader's background. For
example, if a reader isn't acquainted with design patterns then, when
reading source code where design patterns are implemented, some details will
either appear terribly convoluted or even won't even be noticed at all. And
let's not even talk about template metaprogramming. Some of the stuff out
there, even the basic stuff, tends to be a bit mind-blowing if a reader
doesn't know what he is looking at.

True. One reason I believe the C++ Standard Library code is worth reading is
exactly that the reader would now what he is looking at because the purpose of
every exposed API feature is well-documented and it has to be well understood by
the learner anyway. That is, even if he does not know some of it, it's never
waste of his time to read more of the Standard Library specs and learn.

Rui Maciel

-Pavel

 

[Rui Maciel]

Yes, the domain one will work for will probably be different but this does
not make this code less instructive. In my experience, the source code of
STL in particular is one of the best exposures of non-obvious issues one
would face to efficiently implement seemingly straightforward
specifications in C++.

STL API is relatively simple but an efficient implementation uses many
more standard C++ features and implementation-specific extensions than
typical small-scale STL client code (let alone a collection of examples).
Carefully studying why this or that feature was used helps understand why
those more complex features were defined as they were and where they were
either insufficient or inconvenient enough for the library author to use
extensions. A modern version may also give an idea how new C++11 features
can be useful (e.g. see usage of GNU __alignof__ extension in GNU STL that
can be replaced by the standard alignof operator in C++11).

The added advantage of reading STL code is deeper understanding STL specs.
The reader would probably have some initial idea and, as s/he oceeds, s/he
will learn the details s/he will apply when using STL later and get an
idea why the specs are what they are.

Isn't this discussion about introducing a newbie to C++? It seems rather
harsh and counterproductive to tell a newbie to go from writing his first
"hello, world" program to reading the STL source. This looks like an
effective way to drive the newbie *away* from C++.


Rui Maciel

 

[Pavel]

Isn't this discussion about introducing a newbie to C++? It seems rather
harsh and counterproductive to tell a newbie to go from writing his first
"hello, world" program to reading the STL source. This looks like an
effective way to drive the newbie *away* from C++.

Well, my understanding is that his goal is to get hired for a big C++ project?
He certainly would not ask for a book if he was a sophomore or similar -- his
college professor would have told him what to read then.

He has to be able to do at least some practical programming much beyond hello
world and read some code which I suspect will be much less readable than that of
STL to be useful on a big C++ project.

Rui Maciel

-Pavel

 

[Srinivas Nayak]

Hi,

Is there a book on C++11 ?

2nd edition of "Thinking in c++" was published on 2000.
Is there any new edition of this book coming in near future with C++11?

Sincerely,
Srinivas

I am sorry that, my idea behind asking this question was not so clear.

I meant, which book I should purchase, that will give me,
1. a good treatment of concepts of C++, comprehensive and easy understanding.
2. all of C++ in the same book. (then I won't need to buy another book immediately after 6-12 mnths)
3. not written in standard/legal language (like in Stroustrup's book...)
4. should be applicable for beginners to advanced level, not directly staring with STL...

After a lot of search, I agreed with "Thinking in C++", though Lippman's "C++ Primer" is good one, its 4th edition is emphasizing more on STL and template based coding, which I think is difficult for beginners.

With another small thought, I posted the query.
Since the 2nd edition of "Thinking in C++" was out on 2000, it is by now 12 years old. So, if there is a new edition of "Thinking in C++" is coming with C++11, then it would be better to buy.

 

[woodbrian77]

I have a related question.

Should I bother learning c++ 11 if I'm learning C++ to get in to the programming
field. Will big C++ 03 projects continue to hire or is C++11 suddenly in demand?

I'm considering just picking up the books in the FAQ because they're cheap and effective, despite being outdated by the new standard.

C++ 2011 has been in the making for a number of years
so if you haven't started learning it yet, now would
be a good time. I'm not sure how much demand there is
for C++ 2011, but I haven't heard much criticism of the
new standard other than it being very slow in the making.


Shalom,
Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net

 

[richardturdman]

Should I bother learning c++ 11 if I'm learning C++ to get in to the programming
field. Will big C++ 03 projects continue to hire or is C++11 suddenly in demand?

C++11 is where the future is headed.

 

[mike myers]

Check out Scott Meyers book, it was out in 2011 but its still pretty good, http://herbsutter.com/2011/11/01/scott-meyerss-c11-materials-the-best-available-overview-of-c11/

Also if you want to generate c++ from xml files automically, take a look at http://www.liquid-technologies.com/xmldatabinding/xml-schema-to-cpp.aspx, its not as much fun as doing it yourself but it will save you a ton of time.

 

[penguinnate]

I have been reading Professional C++ 2nd edition and have been liking it. It covers all the C++11 features, as well as standard libraries, STL, threading, etc. However this book covers more than just C++ syntax, and really its focus is on Software Engineering using C++. If you're just looking for abook on syntax there is also C++ Primer Plus 6th edition. I haven't reallyread it myself, but I've heard it's not as good as the similarly named C++Primer. If you're willing to wait, there is a new 5th edition of C++ Primer coming out in August that will cover C++11 extensively.

Hope that helps.

 

[none]

Well, my understanding is that his goal is to get hired for a big C++ project?
He certainly would not ask for a book if he was a sophomore or similar -- his
college professor would have told him what to read then.

He has to be able to do at least some practical programming much beyond hello
world and read some code which I suspect will be much less readable than that of
STL to be useful on a big C++ project.

If I interview a candidate for C++ prgramming, I will query if he
knows how to use the STL, not if he knows how to implement it.

A good understanding Meyer, Sutter, Josuttis will be needed for the
interview. A good understanding of STL implementation is more likely
optional unless I am looking for something extremely specific.

 

[algocoders]

The book : "Foundation of Algorithms in C++11, Volume 1: Using and Extending C++11, Boost and Beyond[paperback]": is now available at amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Foundation-Al...ds=foundation+of+algorithms+in+c++11+volume+1

Table of Contents : http://www.algocoders.com/sites/default/files/toc1.pdf
Sample Chapter 1 : http://www.algocoders.com/sites/default/files/1.pdf

For more information, please visit the link below:
http://algocoders.com/article/books

Cheers,
Algocoders
http://www.algocoders.com