Re: Help Please: C/C++ Standard Libraries

Discussion in 'C++' started by Greg P., Aug 28, 2003.

  1. Greg P.

    Greg P. Guest

    "da Vinci" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    | It would be a major help to have a hard copy reference list on hand
    | that lists all of this data.

    The only free references that I know of are online (which can be downloaded
    as html files). Such as dinkumware's reference and SGI's:
    http://dinkumware.com/libraries_ref.html
    http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/table_of_contents.html

    You will most likely get the best results out of a published book. A small,
    pocket-sized reference is available called "The C/C++ Programmer's
    Reference". The author though is rather controversial (and I bought this
    book before I heard anything about Schildt). In my opinion, the book has
    served its purpose fine:
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...f=sr_1_1/102-8829904-9641754?v=glance&s=books

    Some others recommend O'Reilly's Pocket C and Pocket C++ reference books
    over the above one. I have never even seen these so I can't comment on that.
     
    Greg P., Aug 28, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Greg P." <> wrote in message
    news:9Cg3b.6557$...
    > "da Vinci" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > | It would be a major help to have a hard copy reference list on hand
    > | that lists all of this data.
    >
    > The only free references that I know of are online (which can be

    downloaded
    > as html files). Such as dinkumware's reference and SGI's:
    > http://dinkumware.com/libraries_ref.html
    > http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/table_of_contents.html
    >


    You most definitely should not download the dinkumware documentation, please
    read the copyright statement (http://dinkumware.com/refxcpp.html). You could
    of course buy it.

    john
     
    John Harrison, Aug 28, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Greg P." <> wrote in message
    news:gfh3b.6956$...
    > "John Harrison" <> wrote in message
    > news:bik5lv$9ka5g$-berlin.de...
    > | You most definitely should not download the dinkumware documentation,
    > please
    > | read the copyright statement (http://dinkumware.com/refxcpp.html). You
    > could
    > | of course buy it.
    >
    > That is why I gave the book as an example of something to buy.
    >
    > Wow, I didn't know that they were that strict with it though. It doesn't
    > surprise me, I don't much care for their libraries or that online

    reference.
    > I see why Borland used to use the Rogue Wave library over dinkumware's.
    >
    > This just gives my colleagues and I less reason to partake in anything
    > dealing with dinkumware. Good thing for GNU libc, SGI, and STLport!
    >


    Well I take the view that since it is their documentation they're entitled
    to put what restrictions on it they like. Personally I prefer the dinkumware
    docs to the SGI ones but that's obviously just a matter of taste. As for the
    library itself, I've never felt strongly enough to switch from which one is
    supplied with the compiler I use. Comparing the code of different
    implementations can be instructive however, and I definitely find the SGI
    one easier to comprehend.

    john
     
    John Harrison, Aug 28, 2003
    #3
  4. Greg P.

    Greg P. Guest

    "John Harrison" <> wrote in message
    news:bik7j5$acnof$-berlin.de...
    | Well I take the view that since it is their documentation they're entitled
    | to put what restrictions on it they like.

    Always true. I wasn't badmouthing their actions, just a bit shocked that
    they believe it to be so "special" <g>.

    | Personally I prefer the dinkumware
    | docs to the SGI ones but that's obviously just a matter of taste.

    I can't stand either. If I can't find it in one of my texts, I just browse
    the header.

    | As for the
    | library itself, I've never felt strongly enough to switch from which one
    is
    | supplied with the compiler I use. Comparing the code of different
    | implementations can be instructive however, and I definitely find the SGI
    | one easier to comprehend.

    I've used dinkumware for with some compilers previously and didn't much care
    for it(in many ways other than the code itself or by their attitude) at all.
    I usually switched implementations (which is a pain to do the entire C and
    C++ library). As you state, it is all a matter of personal taste (though I
    share my opinion with others). As a general rule I stay away from compilers
    that come with dinkumware.
     
    Greg P., Aug 28, 2003
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    521
    Chris Uppal
    May 5, 2005
  2. KK
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    594
    Big Brian
    Oct 14, 2003
  3. Diego Martins
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    319
    Diego Martins
    Oct 9, 2006
  4. Karsten Wutzke
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    920
    Roedy Green
    Jun 29, 2007
  5. Sriram Srinivasan
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    567
    Benjamin Kaplan
    Nov 12, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page