Re:Why should I have written ZeroMQ in C, not C++ (part II)
by abhijat on Friday August 31, 2012 @01:08AM
(#4458344)
I recently assigned myself a project to learn C++ too, mainly in the interest of learning an entirely different kind of language (I only know python very well) but also to scratch a long pending itch of writing a few simple games and doing some graphics related work.
What I have found, while going through the C++ primer by Stanley Lippman and Barbara Moo (and having read most of accelerated C++ earlier) is that I have not so far seen anything that I really dislike.
Maybe this is because I am not really experienced and so cannot see the obivous pitfalls, or maybe those things will come in later in the book. But so far I see a language which I can use in many places.
Also how is Stroustroup's book for someone who finishes the C++ primer (which goes over just the basics).
Re:Why should I have written ZeroMQ in C, not C++ (part II)
by itsboring on Friday August 31, 2012 @03:07PM
(#4461194)
I recommend Stroustroup's book as it really leaves no area unexplored. It is better to read it after having read some other material, as you have. I would wait for the 4th edition, though, which covers C++11.
Re:Why should I have written ZeroMQ in C, not C++ (part II)
by sys_argv on Thursday August 30, 2012 @04:22PM
(#4456560)
I'm curious to know how long this has taken you to achieve.
Re:Why should I have written ZeroMQ in C, not C++ (part II)
by itsboring on Thursday August 30, 2012 @07:46PM
(#4457475)
It's really tough to say, I've been working on it off and on for a few months. But I didn't really keep track of the time spent. I'll probably put it up on github when finished and see if anyone wants to rip apart my solutions and/or contribute better ones.
It's been grueling, but very well worth the time. It helps me avoid a lot of mistakes I would have made had I just jumped in from C and C#.
Unfortunately, the 4th edition (which presumably covers C++11) doesn't come out until Feb.