C++ material

[rudra]

Dear friends,
as in the previous post, i told i am just started learnning C++ and i
have no background in C either. in my institute, there is no C/C++
user and hence my learnning is very slow as i have found C++ a bit
complicated(plz dnt get angry). Some ppl(not experienced) ppl
suggested me to learn C first before venturing to C++....is it a good
idea? because, the syntax might be same but as far as i understood,
the approach in attackin a problem is quite different.
Recently i have found a nice book by Herbert Schildt nameing **C++
Nuts and Bolts, for Experienced Programmers** with which i can go much
with my previous experience.
though internet is filled with C++ tutorials, there dependability is
in question; as even a novice as me can found one is contradicting
other. So will you ppl plz suggest me some good resources in net?
I have that book by Schildt and Strousstrup(found a bit hard).Any
other good book?

 

[lbonafide]

other. So will you ppl plz suggest me some good resources in net?
I have that book by Schildt and Strousstrup(found a bit hard).Any
other good book?

Google for "Thinking in C++" by Eckel.

 

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Dear friends,
as in the previous post, i told i am just started learnning C++ and i
have no background in C either. in my institute, there is no C/C++
user and hence my learnning is very slow as i have found C++ a bit
complicated(plz dnt get angry). Some ppl(not experienced) ppl
suggested me to learn C first before venturing to C++....is it a good
idea? because, the syntax might be same but as far as i understood,
the approach in attackin a problem is quite different.

I find some value in learning things in the historical order. This
allows you to understand better the reasons why things are the way
they are, and gives you a less steep learning curve.

In the case of C and C++, I've got the impression it would be harder
to learn C++ first and more painful to try to learn C thereafter.


Really, I too would advice to learn C first. That is, if you want to
learn C at all, and if you plan ever to write C programs.


Some will tell you that you would have to unlearn some of C to become
a C++ programmer. Well I think that's something different, that's the
question of methodology (OO) and program architecture, etc. You can
write good OO code in C, if you know OO. And of course you can write
also good structured code in C++, if you're a good structured
programmer ;-), but people will cry if you do.


Otherwise, you can just learn OO and C++ at once, and forget about
this C thing.

 

[Bo Persson]

I find some value in learning things in the historical order. This
allows you to understand better the reasons why things are the way
they are, and gives you a less steep learning curve.

In the case of C and C++, I've got the impression it would be harder
to learn C++ first and more painful to try to learn C thereafter.

After you have learned C++, using C is painful - yes.

Really, I too would advice to learn C first. That is, if you want
to learn C at all, and if you plan ever to write C programs.

If you want to learn C, do that. If you want to learn C++, do that.

There are lots of things in C, mostly low level, that you have
absolutely no use for in C++. Why spend your time learning that, if
the goal is to learn C++?



Bo Persson

 

[Puppet_Sock]

So will you ppl plz suggest me some good resources in net?

You really should buy a book or two.

_Accelerated C++_ by Koenig and Moo.

Somebody else already mentioned _Thinking in C++_.

You should also cruise to www.accu.org and check their book
reviews. When you've got the basics down then you will want
to delve into specialized areas.

I have that book by Schildt and Strousstrup(found a bit hard).Any
other good book?

Stroustrup.

Ok, if Schildt and Stroustrup wrote a book together
A) I'm surprised,
B) I've never heard of it, and
C) I'm REALLY surprised.

You will probably be able to handily live without Schildt.
I've heard that one of his more recent C++ books is ok, but
the earlier ones have left a bad enough taste that I really
can't be bothered to check.

It reminds me of an old joke about the opera, the punchline
of which is "You bloody do it again until you bloody get
it right!"
Socks

 

[red floyd]

Stroustrup.

Ok, if Schildt and Stroustrup wrote a book together
A) I'm surprised,
B) I've never heard of it, and
C) I'm REALLY surprised.

I think you're probably joking, but the parse is "I have Schildt, and I
also have Stroustrup".
=

 

[rudra]

Ok, if Schildt and Stroustrup wrote a book together
A) I'm surprised,
B) I've never heard of it, and
C) I'm REALLY surprised.

Dear Puppet_Sock,
u neednt get surprised.....i just want to mention that i have to C++
book with me..one by Schildt and other by BS.....

 

[arnuld]

After you have learned C++, using C is painful - yes.

Right. I am feeling lot of difficulty in learning C right now. Most of the
times I forget about the problem I am working on ans struggle with K&R2.

Many Many people say that C++ is complex and monstrous whereas C is small
and simple. I have found C to be as complex as of C++. Regarding C++ is a
big monster, thats not as much of as a big deal as many people think

If you want to learn C, do that. If you want to learn C++, do that.

I tried learning C first and my C++ code was terrible, then I took the
opposite approach and I am happy now.

There are lots of things in C, mostly low level, that you have
absolutely no use for in C++. Why spend your time learning that, if the
goal is to learn C++?

Exactly. The 1st question is not C++ or C. It is what is th goal of yours ?