|Title||:||C++ For Dummies 6th edition by Davis, Stephen R. (2009) Taschenbuch|
|Publisher||:||For Dummies 1709|
|Number of Pages||:||298 Pages|
|File Size||:||798 KB|
|Status||:||Available For Download|
|Last checked||:||21 Minutes ago!|
C++ For Dummies 6th edition by Davis, Stephen R. (2009) Taschenbuch Reviews
Falls man vor vielen Jahren mal C benutzt hat ist das eine gute Möglichkeit es wieder aufzufrischen und sich selbst zu aktualisieren.
I had been trying to make the transition to OO programming for a year or two, and had tried 3-4 other books on C++, without any real luck at all. This was the first "Dummies" book I had ever bought, and I wasn't expecting much. What a surprise!!The author is a professional C++ programmer who always cuts to the chase and leaves the irrelevant stuff aside e.g. overloaded operators.Give yourself time. Work through this book a chapter at a time, and type in the examples and compile them as they come. The book will give you understanding. I wouldn't recommend reading 100 pages and then slipping the 6th example into your C++ compiler just to see if it compiles, and then complaining when the MS compiler burps. I found no errors in any of the example code.All in all, this book is a model for all programming authors. Concepts are clear and CORRECT. When I finished this, I was able to go back to my other C++ books and realize (to my horror) that their authors didn't understand what they were writing about, but had rushed into a hot new programming language just to get the bucks. One of these books explained "polymorphism" as an obscure C++ feature which wise programmers avoided because it was impossible to understand.This is a great book. It only needs $20 and a few dedicated days of your time. It is not (in my opinion) for those who don't understand normal, non-OO, procedural programming.
This book, unlike the other dummies books, is not aimed at total newbies, because that would be impossible in a book this short. Although I used it to learn the basics of C++, I don't recommend it because : the book spends a huge amount of time on meaningless gibberish, when I read a programming book I don't want to laugh, I want to learn; the author does not understand the principles behind OOP, only some syntax; finally, this book is _entirely_ useless once you have finished reading it.
I have years of experience in C++ programming, have read more than 10 "GOOD" books (a la Lippman's C++ primer, Stroustrup's C++ ARM and more..)... And one day, I found this book in the library, so I picked it up to see what sort of book this is.. (because I like reading programming stuff..) ... And all I have to say about this is already in the title line.... This is not the book for dummies, it is for become a dummy in programming world.If you are a novice, I think there are a lot of books that have done a far better job than this one.
In comparison to Dan Gookin's fantastic synopsis of the C language, in C for Dummies, this book is nothing. What kind of book is this supposed to be?!? I cannot even read this book. It is very jam-packed, and hard to comprehend at times. My suggestion is to find a different book, one which has easier-to-comprehend chapters, and is not so boring. I believe I've proven my point.
I've been looking for just the right introduction to programming for some time. I've spent more than a dozen hours combing through the shelves in my local Borders and B&N, skimming over 50 so-called "introductory" texts, looking for one that I could really learn from. By way of background, I am an advanced computer user/tinkerer, but I'm completely inexperienced in the field of programming -- never so much as typed a lick of code.In reviewing other books, I didn't want to start with a book about C, because conventional wisdom says that it's a bad idea to start with C (a procedural language) if you plan to use it to jumpstart a study of C++ or java (hybrid OOP languages). I also didn't want to start with a book on QBasic, because it seems to me that the language is pretty much obsolete. For me, I wanted to learn OOP, and that meant a commitment to C++ and/or java (preferably both, as each has its strengths and weaknesses, and they are similar and popular enough to study together).That said, I looked at somewhat advanced introductory books by Deitel, Savitch, and Horton, all of which are extremely well-reviewed here on Amazon. I also looked at several books from Microsoft Press, as I planned on learning by using components of the Visual Studio. Horton's Beginning C++ came close, but its massive size and more advanced approach left me looking for a different introductory text (I plan on returning to Horton's book though, to supplement what I learn from Mr. Davis' book).Finally, this new edition of C++ for Dummies came out just in time. This book really hits the mark on many levels: (1) it assumes no knowledge of programming; (2) it does a great job of explaining truly complex topics without going overboard or hitting you over the head; (3) it is clear and entertaining; and (4) it is new and compliant with the latest standards, which is more than I can say for books written, say, pre-1998.Do yourself a favor -- if you have no programming experience and want to learn a cutting edge OOP language like C++ or java, start here, then use that knowledge to branch out to more advanced material. Personally, I'm supplementing this reading with Horton's Beginning C++ and Beginning Java 2 (JDK 1.3 Version), and Bruce Eckel's highly praised Thinking in Java.Good luck!
I found this book -very- helpful as I was struggling to learn C++ from Deitel and Deitel. This latter book tends to be encyclopedic and alright for review, but difficult to learn from. That is precisely where I found Davis' book so helpful. The philosophical discussion of OOP and the gradual transforming of a procedural, C program into an object-oriented, C++ program were particularly instructive It is true that he assumes you know some C -- he states this outright on p. 3 in my edition. For those of you who felt burned thereby, I'd kindly suggest going back, plugging away at C for a while, and then giving this book another chance. Evidently (judging from the responses) this is the sort of book that is really hit or miss with people; I'd prefer to accept that fact simply and chalk it up to differences in the readership itself than ascribe it to the book itself. With me it was obviously a hit and I believe there are quite a few people out there, befuddled by the likes of Deitel and Deitel, who may similarly benefit from this book.