c++ standard
in [Learn C or C++]
|
From: neil on 23 Jun 2010 13:45 Does a novice like me need to be worried about the c++ standard? In other words is it a waste of money at this stage to buy a copy? I'm learning the language and not doing anything heavy duty.
From: Richard Heathfield on 23 Jun 2010 14:59 neil wrote: > Does a novice like me need to be worried about the c++ standard? In > other words is it a waste of money at this stage to buy a copy? > I'm learning the language and not doing anything heavy duty. You need to be worried about it, but you don't necessarily need to buy a copy. What you need to know is (a) what the Standard is, (b) what it is for, and (c) why it's important. Having that information, you are more likely to react positively to advice based upon it! The Standard is a unifying document that provides a common definition of C++ to which all conforming implementations subscribe. Well, that's the theory - there are some corner cases where it isn't quite true, but it's true enough to be useful. It's important because it means that, if you stick to that common definition of C++, you can write a program in C++ that will work on any conforming C++ compiler - the stuff you learn on ThisCompiler(tm) will also work on ThatCompiler(tm), *provided* that the Standard says it will. Nobody can reasonably claim to be an expert on every dialect of C++ Out There, which is why questions about specific implementations (e.g. Visual C++, or GNU C++, or Borland C++, or whatever) are better asked in groups dedicated to those implementations. But questions about the core language work well here - and those questions will very likely be answered by people who refer and defer to the Standard. -- Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk> Email: -http://www. +rjh@ "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line vacant - apply within
From: Kensai on 23 Jun 2010 16:12 Great reply! I'm saving a local copy for future memory. On 6/23/2010 8:59 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: > neil wrote: >> Does a novice like me need to be worried about the c++ standard? In >> other words is it a waste of money at this stage to buy a copy? >> I'm learning the language and not doing anything heavy duty. > > You need to be worried about it, but you don't necessarily need to buy a > copy. What you need to know is (a) what the Standard is, (b) what it is > for, and (c) why it's important. Having that information, you are more > likely to react positively to advice based upon it! > > The Standard is a unifying document that provides a common definition of > C++ to which all conforming implementations subscribe. Well, that's the > theory - there are some corner cases where it isn't quite true, but it's > true enough to be useful. It's important because it means that, if you > stick to that common definition of C++, you can write a program in C++ > that will work on any conforming C++ compiler - the stuff you learn on > ThisCompiler(tm) will also work on ThatCompiler(tm), *provided* that the > Standard says it will. > > Nobody can reasonably claim to be an expert on every dialect of C++ Out > There, which is why questions about specific implementations (e.g. > Visual C++, or GNU C++, or Borland C++, or whatever) are better asked in > groups dedicated to those implementations. But questions about the core > language work well here - and those questions will very likely be > answered by people who refer and defer to the Standard. >
From: neil on 23 Jun 2010 17:00 Richard Heathfield <rjh(a)see.sig.invalid> wrote: > neil wrote: >> Does a novice like me need to be worried about the c++ standard? In >> other words is it a waste of money at this stage to buy a copy? >> I'm learning the language and not doing anything heavy duty. > > You need to be worried about it, but you don't necessarily need to buy > a copy. What you need to know is (a) what the Standard is, (b) what it > is for, and (c) why it's important. Having that information, you are > more likely to react positively to advice based upon it! > > The Standard is a unifying document that provides a common definition > of C++ to which all conforming implementations subscribe. Well, that's > the theory - there are some corner cases where it isn't quite true, > but it's true enough to be useful. It's important because it means > that, if you stick to that common definition of C++, you can write a > program in C++ that will work on any conforming C++ compiler - the > stuff you learn on ThisCompiler(tm) will also work on > ThatCompiler(tm), *provided* that the Standard says it will. > > Nobody can reasonably claim to be an expert on every dialect of C++ > Out There, which is why questions about specific implementations (e.g. > Visual C++, or GNU C++, or Borland C++, or whatever) are better asked > in groups dedicated to those implementations. But questions about the > core language work well here - and those questions will very likely be > answered by people who refer and defer to the Standard. Thank you very much for taking the time to read and respond to my message. Your answer is very helpful.
From: TheGunslinger on 25 Jun 2010 14:17 On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 21:00:47 +0000 (UTC), neil <invalid(a)invalid.net> wrote: >Richard Heathfield <rjh(a)see.sig.invalid> wrote: >> neil wrote: >>> Does a novice like me need to be worried about the c++ standard? In >>> other words is it a waste of money at this stage to buy a copy? >>> I'm learning the language and not doing anything heavy duty. >> >> You need to be worried about it, but you don't necessarily need to buy >> a copy. What you need to know is (a) what the Standard is, (b) what it >> is for, and (c) why it's important. Having that information, you are >> more likely to react positively to advice based upon it! >> >> The Standard is a unifying document that provides a common definition >> of C++ to which all conforming implementations subscribe. Well, that's >> the theory - there are some corner cases where it isn't quite true, >> but it's true enough to be useful. It's important because it means >> that, if you stick to that common definition of C++, you can write a >> program in C++ that will work on any conforming C++ compiler - the >> stuff you learn on ThisCompiler(tm) will also work on >> ThatCompiler(tm), *provided* that the Standard says it will. >> >> Nobody can reasonably claim to be an expert on every dialect of C++ >> Out There, which is why questions about specific implementations (e.g. >> Visual C++, or GNU C++, or Borland C++, or whatever) are better asked >> in groups dedicated to those implementations. But questions about the >> core language work well here - and those questions will very likely be >> answered by people who refer and defer to the Standard. > >Thank you very much for taking the time to read and respond to my >message. Your answer is very helpful. You might do a search for >> C++ FAQ's Lite << which will introduce you the standard with some coding examples. It is free to d/l. Hope this helps GL... MJR
|
Pages: 1 Prev: Deitel's C++ Books Next: OFF TOPIC - Please help with Playpen errors |