Has anybody here read the C++ Standard Document? - openSUSE Programming - openSUSE Mailing Lists

newer
Namespaces compared to Java...

Has anybody here read the C++ Standard Document?

older
Pointer strangeness

Steven T. Hatton

10 Apr 2003 10 Apr '03

19:44

I was thinking about getting the electronic version of the C++ ANSI standard for $18. I'm really not sure what that document might be like. From what I can gather it is some 700+ pages long. That is much larger than I expected it to be. Has anybody on this list read this document, or at least looked it over carefully? STH

Reply

Sign in to reply online Use email software

Show replies by date

Jerry Feldman

10 Apr 10 Apr

20:13

New subject: [suse-programming-e] Has anybody here read the C++ Standard Document?

On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 15:44:08 -0400 "Steven T. Hatton" wrote:

I was thinking about getting the electronic version of the C++ ANSI standard for $18. I'm really not sure what that document might be like. From what I can gather it is some 700+ pages long. That is much larger than I expected it to be. Has anybody on this list read this document, or at least looked it over carefully? Standards documents are not for consumtion by mere users of code. They are designed for people who write and maintain the compilers. In your case, I think you need a good C++ book. The C++ Primer (http://www.aw.com/catalog/academic/product/1,4096,0201824701,00.html) or C++, How to Program (http://www.prenhall.com/deitel/) are two decent books. My copy of the C++ draft standard is a bit out of date. In other words, IMHO, it is a waste of money. I would fork out the money myself if I were to go back into compiler work. As I mentioned previously, when I had to work in a pure C++ environment I found the C++ Primer the best resourse. I could easily look up what I needed to know since was was a bit rusty.

-- Jerry Feldman Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9

Reply

Sign in to reply online Use email software

Steven T. Hatton

20:52

New subject: [suse-programming-e] Has anybody here read the C++ Standard Document?

On Thursday 10 April 2003 04:13 pm, Jerry Feldman wrote:

On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 15:44:08 -0400

"Steven T. Hatton" wrote:

...
I was thinking about getting the electronic version of the C++ ANSI standard for $18. I'm really not sure what that document might be like. From what I can gather it is some 700+ pages long. That is much larger than I expected it to be. Has anybody on this list read this document, or at least looked it over carefully?

Standards documents are not for consumtion by mere users of code. They are designed for people who write and maintain the compilers. In your case, I think you need a good C++ book. The C++ Primer (http://www.aw.com/catalog/academic/product/1,4096,0201824701,00.html) or C++, How to Program (http://www.prenhall.com/deitel/) are two decent books. My copy of the C++ draft standard is a bit out of date. In other words, IMHO, it is a waste of money. I would fork out the money myself if I were to go back into compiler work. As I mentioned previously, when I had to work in a pure C++ environment I found the C++ Primer the best resourse. I could easily look up what I needed to know since was was a bit rusty.

I picked up Stroustrup's 'phone book'. I looked over the other candidates you mentioned. I know it's not a very objective way of selecting a book, but when I saw "The road goes ever on and on" -- Bilbo Baggins, at the head of the preface, I couldn't bring myself to consider not getting Bjarne's book. I also picked up an REA /Essentials/ book http://www.rea.com/display_prod.cfm?p=0878917489&g=0878916849 It's actually not all that bad. The reason I was considering the standard document was that the REA book is clearly not rigorously adhering to the standard. I'm sure Stroustrup is more faithful to the standard. I was just thinking it might be helpful to have the actual letter of the standard on hand. I'll be the first to admit standards documents can be inaccessible to most mortals. I've read some that are quite lucid, and some (ECMA Script comes to mind) that are virtually intractible. I still find the size of the C++ document surprising. What the heck is in it? The grammar takes all of 22 pages. I find that extremely large. But to increase that by 35 times, is quite an accomplishment. STH

Reply

Sign in to reply online Use email software

Jerry Feldman

11 Apr 11 Apr

11:04

New subject: [suse-programming-e] Has anybody here read the C++ Standard Document?

The reason I was considering the standard document was that the REA book is clearly not rigorously adhering to the standard. I'm sure Stroustrup is more faithful to the standard. I was just thinking it might be helpful to have the actual letter of the standard on hand. I'll be the first to admit standards documents can be inaccessible to most mortals. I've read some that are quite lucid, and some (ECMA Script comes to mind) that are virtually intractible.

I still find the size of the C++ document surprising. What the heck is in it? The grammar takes all of 22 pages. I find that extremely large. But to increase that by 35 times, is quite an accomplishment. I'll try not to reiterate what John wrote. A standarrds document not only describes the grammar in BNF, but also needs to be very explicit about how things must behave. John showed a template example. And, it is

On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:52:04 -0400 "Steven T. Hatton" wrote: the document that a compliant compiler must follow. So, even simple things like expressions must be explicitly defined. -- Jerry Feldman Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9

Reply

Sign in to reply online Use email software

John Lamb

10 Apr 10 Apr

20:30

New subject: [suse-programming-e] Has anybody here read the C++ Standard Document?

Steven T. Hatton wrote:

I was thinking about getting the electronic version of the C++ ANSI standard for $18. I'm really not sure what that document might be like. From what I can gather it is some 700+ pages long. That is much larger than I expected it to be. Has anybody on this list read this document, or at least looked it over carefully?

STH

I haven't read it and wouldn't want to do so. A document like this is more likely to be useful if you're writing a C++ compiler than if you're writing a C++ program. It's much better to start with a book like Deitel and Deitel, or even Stroustrup that tells you how C++ works in practice. C++ is a big language and you'll find expressions like the following are legal (I think!) template class { public: Y<X> operator()( Y<X>* a ); } f; There are actually uses for such things, but it would be unwise to assume that any C++ compiler actually supports all of them. On the other hand, there are lots of class libraries (Qt) for example, that are more obviously useful, but not defined in the standard. -- JDL Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit.

Reply

Sign in to reply online Use email software

7696

Age (days ago)

7697

Last active (days ago)

Download

4 comments

3 participants

tags

participants (3)

Jerry Feldman
John Lamb
Steven T. Hatton