well i am very interesting in C++ coding, and others type of coding, btw i just got small experience on coding using php/html and mysql..i read many type of discussion here but.. i cant understand your language, i mean germany lang or other language..i only understand my main lang and english..so can someone show me or link to me the pdf or ebook in english that contains everything for me to read? even take an ages..lol
C++ ?
12/02/2011 18:22
PraDevil[ELITE]#1
12/04/2011 23:33
derjans#2
Hey,
first of all it would be better to buy a C++ book.
In this Section (Coding, C++) are more german people active, so it would be better to look in a board where only english is spoken.
I cant give you a link, but I'm sure you find one-
first of all it would be better to buy a C++ book.
In this Section (Coding, C++) are more german people active, so it would be better to look in a board where only english is spoken.
I cant give you a link, but I'm sure you find one-
12/04/2011 23:48
Dr. Coxxy#3
go to your local library and buy/lend a c (not c++) beginner book with >500 pages.
read, understand and try out.
then go again to your library and buy/lend a c++ book (more than 500 pages...) and learn object orientated programming with c++, it will be pretty easy as its much repetition, to consolidate your previously acquired knowledge, but its another aspect of how to solve problems.
while c goes pretty straigtforward to solve one precise problem, c++ with its object orientated aspect will divide the problem into objects with its own attributes and functions (and problems?).
(this is just a oversimplification, c++ can be pretty straightforward too, and c is also capable to divide a problem into 'kinda objects')
and many ppl will disagree with me, learning c first and after that repeat some steps with learning c++...
read, understand and try out.
then go again to your library and buy/lend a c++ book (more than 500 pages...) and learn object orientated programming with c++, it will be pretty easy as its much repetition, to consolidate your previously acquired knowledge, but its another aspect of how to solve problems.
while c goes pretty straigtforward to solve one precise problem, c++ with its object orientated aspect will divide the problem into objects with its own attributes and functions (and problems?).
(this is just a oversimplification, c++ can be pretty straightforward too, and c is also capable to divide a problem into 'kinda objects')
and many ppl will disagree with me, learning c first and after that repeat some steps with learning c++...
12/05/2011 16:25
MrSm!th#4
Thats bullshit. If you want to learn C++, learn it immeditately and do not learn C first.Quote:
go to your local library and buy/lend a c (not c++) beginner book with >500 pages.
read, understand and try out.
then go again to your library and buy/lend a c++ book (more than 500 pages...) and learn object orientated programming with c++, it will be pretty easy as its much repetition, to consolidate your previously acquired knowledge, but its another aspect of how to solve problems.
It will only make your C++ style much worse.
12/05/2011 16:28
PraDevil[ELITE]#5
why do i need to learn c first then c++? it is require?
btw i already read a c++ book with a little training on it...
btw i already read a c++ book with a little training on it...
12/05/2011 18:14
Dr. Coxxy#6
its not required, but i suggest it, cause learning the c++ way of solving problems will fuck up your style and you will miss some essential experiences how a computer works...
it just depends on what you call 'good' style and what you call 'bad' style.
i call everything bad style which is using object orientation in a programm with less than ~1500 lines and only 1 person working on it.
thats just bullshit, object orientation was made to divide a problem into smaller problems which can be solved by different independent working groups and to abstract things.
you wont have to abstract anything in any of your projects you will code in the next ~1-2 years.
it just depends on what you call 'good' style and what you call 'bad' style.
i call everything bad style which is using object orientation in a programm with less than ~1500 lines and only 1 person working on it.
thats just bullshit, object orientation was made to divide a problem into smaller problems which can be solved by different independent working groups and to abstract things.
you wont have to abstract anything in any of your projects you will code in the next ~1-2 years.
12/05/2011 19:07
MrSm!th#7
seriously, what. da. fuck.Quote:
its not required, but i suggest it, cause learning the c++ way of solving problems will fuck up your style and you will miss some essential experiences how a computer works...
It will improve your style very much.
The programming language does not have much to do with the way a computer works. You do not even need it in C. Both languages are very close to the hardware and you can use both to write things like hardware drivers etc.
But learning the language has nothing to do with hardware, neither in C++ nor in C.
And the object orientated view does not fuck up your style, nor does it interfere with your understanding of the hardware.
If you really want to understand hardware, learn ASM (and you can use it in C and C++!).
A very stupid way of thinking. And btw. 1500 lines is not a very big project.Quote:
i call everything bad style which is using object orientation in a programm with less than ~1500 lines and only 1 person working on it.
You do not need more than one programmer to justify OOP.
This is just wrong. If you havent had to, I think you are just a beginner or you got basic projects only...Quote:
you wont have to abstract anything in any of your projects you will code in the next ~1-2 years.
Btw. I dont know any C++ tutorial or book which immediately teaches OOP (as it is done with java sometimes), you always learn a bit procedural C++, something "like" C.
And no matter what style you prefer: Its always a bad choice to learn a language you actually dont want to know, just to "understand" your wished language better or because someone says so.
12/06/2011 16:15
Dr. Coxxy#8
sry, but c++ only coders tend to overuse the object orientated aspect, like it would be java were you are 'forced' to use it.
this is my opinion i got from reading code snippets on the internet and reading bullshit code by friends...
1500 lines is a small 'project', why use the very mighty object orientation for a simple 'i do not know what kid coded this app, which is like 1 day c+p work'?
this is my opinion i got from reading code snippets on the internet and reading bullshit code by friends...
thats what i meant,Quote:
A very stupid way of thinking. And btw. 1500 lines is not a very big project.
You do not need more than one programmer to justify OOP.
1500 lines is a small 'project', why use the very mighty object orientation for a simple 'i do not know what kid coded this app, which is like 1 day c+p work'?
most C-Books tend to explain what the code is doing on hardware/low level and give a basic instruction of how registers, stack etc. work (this is my experience/opinion...), while c++ books tend to focus on the object orientation, and doing only a quick startup on syntax, datatypes and control-flow commands without any explanations (like the difference between a switch and a 'if... else if... else if... else if...)(this is my experience/optinion...).Quote:
The programming language does not have much to do with the way a computer works. You do not even need it in C. Both languages are very close to the hardware and you can use both to write things like hardware drivers etc.
But learning the language has nothing to do with hardware, neither in C++ nor in C.
12/06/2011 17:59
MrSm!th#9
But your opinion is wrong :PQuote:
sry, but c++ only coders tend to overuse the object orientated aspect, like it would be java were you are 'forced' to use it.
this is my opinion i got from reading code snippets on the internet and reading bullshit code by friends...
There is just a little amount of projects (compared to most tasks a programmer has to do with) which should be realised in C instead of C++ for a good programmer (not a beginner who writes 1337 warrock hacks only), because most concepts can be described object-orientated and it does not always complicate it unnecessarily.
And again: You actually learn the procedural programming with C++! C++ is NOT ONLY object-orientated, it is procedural, oo and generic!
And a good programmer uses all of those techniques.
Every good book/tutorial starts with a few basic procedural aspects e.g.
Code:
int main()
{
std::cout << "hello world" << std::endl;
return 0;
}
You must NOT mix up C code with a few features of C++ or procedural C++ and OO C++!
They are actually different types!
And be honest: If you learn a bit of C in every C++ book, you dont have to learn C first. You dont have to know anything about the C standard and thats the only thing you would skip by directly learning C++.
You can still look needed functions up later on.
(those warrock hack "coders" just copypaste (or at least they "learn" from it and imitate it) C++ code, so they basically see OO source codes of experienced programmers and overuse those techniques; I think that is what you experienced (not only for warrock^^))
edit:
Ah, btw. I find it interesting how experiences differ :D
I saw many people who just used the procedural part of C++, they just used C with a few extra-features like a string class. That is a bad style, as well as writing object-orientated only.
12/08/2011 11:40
MoepMeep#10
Ye, now read code from ppl who actually made their master in computer science(or something similar). Notice the difference?Quote:
sry, but c++ only coders tend to overuse the object orientated aspect, like it would be java were you are 'forced' to use it.
this is my opinion i got from reading code snippets on the internet and reading bullshit code by friends...
Number of lines has nothing to do how big the project is. Has even less to do whether you should use oop or not. There is always the chance that you will need exactly the same class again in another project, even if it's just 100lines.Quote:
1500 lines is a small 'project', why use the very mighty object orientation for a simple 'i do not know what kid coded this app, which is like 1 day c+p work'?
Has nothing to do with the language.Quote:
most C-Books tend to explain what the code is doing on hardware/low level and give a basic instruction of how registers, stack etc. work
Everyone who can code C++ can code C. Not everyone who can code C can code C++ :P (I'm talking about people who really know what they are doing). And never forget, a experienced coder won't have any problem using another language within a short amount of time.Quote:
while c++ books tend to focus on the object orientation, and doing only a quick startup on syntax, datatypes and control-flow commands without any explanations (like the difference between a switch and a 'if... else if... else if... else if...)(this is my experience/optinion...).
But hey, we all know the thread starter gonna fail anyway :<
12/08/2011 15:21
Dr. Coxxy#11
as i already said, this is my experience only...
most of the ppl who call theirself 'c++ coders' dont know shit.
cause theyve started right off with a File-class etc... (nothing against the File class - i love it - but atleast i am able to handle files without it...)
they dont know how to use a 'goto', 'register', 'volatile', 'typedef' etc... properly.
ok, maybe typedef, but most of 'c++ coders' havent even heard from the other commands, cause most c++ books dont even MENTION them...
as i already said... this is my experience...
yes i know, but as i already said, by my experience, C-Books tend to explain more detailed what the code is doing on hardware...Quote:
Has nothing to do with the language.
sorry but most ppl dont really know what they are doing...Quote:
(I'm talking about people who really know what they are doing)
nope.Quote:
Everyone who can code C++ can code C.
most of the ppl who call theirself 'c++ coders' dont know shit.
cause theyve started right off with a File-class etc... (nothing against the File class - i love it - but atleast i am able to handle files without it...)
they dont know how to use a 'goto', 'register', 'volatile', 'typedef' etc... properly.
ok, maybe typedef, but most of 'c++ coders' havent even heard from the other commands, cause most c++ books dont even MENTION them...
as i already said... this is my experience...
12/08/2011 15:39
MoepMeep#12
Quote:
most of the ppl who call theirself 'c++ coders' dont know shit.
k?Quote:
(I'm talking about people who really know what they are doing)
Made me laugh, bye :>Quote:
'goto'
12/09/2011 00:29
MrSm!th#13
and this is important because...?Quote:
yes i know, but as i already said, by my experience, C-Books tend to explain more detailed what the code is doing on hardware...
If you want to know something about the hardware, learn ASM.
C++ AND C were especially designed to ABSTRACT programming from the hardware!
And thats the fault of c++? :rolleyes:Quote:
sorry but most ppl dont really know what they are doing...
they wouldnt know shit if they learned C neither.
then dont talk about them, we are talking about c++ coders, not about people who cal themselves like that.Quote:
nope.
most of the ppl who call theirself 'c++ coders' dont know shit.
seriously, thats bullshit.Quote:
cause theyve started right off with a File-class etc... (nothing against the File class - i love it - but atleast i am able to handle files without it...)
everyone who has to do with the WinApi can use file handles.
and i dont see any reason why one would prefer the C file handle system if he can use the c++ file class.
it has nothing to do with being nooblike or something like that.
goto is shit.Quote:
they dont know how to use a 'goto', 'register', 'volatile', 'typedef' etc... properly.
and if they dont know volatile and typedef, they havent learned C++ correctly.
again: not the fault of c++.
you didnt even read one, did you? :facepalm:Quote:
ok, maybe typedef, but most of 'c++ coders' havent even heard from the other commands, cause most c++ books dont even MENTION them...
as i already said... this is my experience...
12/09/2011 14:25
Dr. Coxxy#14
flamewar just begun.
just opened one of my C-books at random position and first thing i see is a chapter about heap fragmention.
sorry, but i never saw a c++ book which handles things like this.
goto is shit?
yes it CAN be shit if used wrong...
all these things are not fault of the language c++, but c++ books, tuts or whatsoever tend to ignore those...
and sorry you cant use the c++ file class everywhere...
and just to repeat, its not the fault of the language c++ (since its superior to c as a language...), but fault of the ppl who write c++ books and say 'heres everything you need, you dont need to learn c, c++ is BETTER' and then fill 1/5 of the book with some C-basics and continue with the object orientation without teaching them c properly.
just opened one of my C-books at random position and first thing i see is a chapter about heap fragmention.
sorry, but i never saw a c++ book which handles things like this.
goto is shit?
yes it CAN be shit if used wrong...
all these things are not fault of the language c++, but c++ books, tuts or whatsoever tend to ignore those...
and sorry you cant use the c++ file class everywhere...
and just to repeat, its not the fault of the language c++ (since its superior to c as a language...), but fault of the ppl who write c++ books and say 'heres everything you need, you dont need to learn c, c++ is BETTER' and then fill 1/5 of the book with some C-basics and continue with the object orientation without teaching them c properly.
12/09/2011 14:34
MoepMeep#15
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]Quote:
yes it CAN be shit if used wrong
Can't think of a reason why you shouldn't atm. What about an example?Quote:
and sorry you cant use the c++ file class everywhere...
Oh ye, those bad authors who do not teach C in a C++ book! Want to know why? Coz you do not need it.Quote:
but fault of the ppl who write c++ books and say 'heres everything you need' and then fill 1/5 of the book with some C-basics and continue with the object orientation without teaching them c properly.