[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Semi-OT] Advice on whether a C++ book is still adequate

In <[🔎] 4D706E9F.9050606@cox.net>, Ron Johnson wrote:
>I have the dusty book "Teach Yourself C++ 4th Ed" by Al Stevens,
>from... 1995 and wonder that if I go thru it will I screw myself up
>because of new language features.

I would ignore C++0x for now.  I'm not sure if it has been published yet, but 
many of the new features won't be available portably for a couple of years.

Instead, focus on C++98 and C++03.  Neither were available at the time that 
book was written, so I'd probably look for a more recent reference.  Prior to 
C++98, there was no standard[1] for the C++ language.  You might also be 
interested in the C99 specifications -- they are not directly related to C++, 
but C++ is built upon some C and C99 is must more well-specified than C89 (the 
basis of C++98).

[1] Depending on what you consider a standard.
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                   ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net                   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy         `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/                    \_/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: