Customer Reviews

C++ Programmer's Notebook (2nd Edition)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

You may be baffled by the wide disparity in ratings for each of the various editions of this book. You may also be confused by the pricing on Amazon for the different editions. At the time that I'm writing this, the copyright 2002 version of the Second Edition is not available new, but is dirt cheap in like-new condition. The older 1998 version is $35. That, I can't explain.

Perhaps I can explain the disparity in ratings. As other reviewers have stated, this book presents material in two-page encapsulations. You get a single topic, with code and accompanying explanation, in each two-page section. Sometimes the encapsulation is weak, in that there is some carry over from previous sections, but not typically.

Jim Keogh, the senior author, has written a slew of books on programming. He apparently started down this path when he wrote a column for Popular Electronics magazine called "Programmer's Notebook," beginning way back in 1982. The format for his column was probably similar to the format in Notebook: one short topic at a time. This is an easy way to write a book, since you don't have to worry much about continuity. My guess is that some of his early books made use of a lot of repackaging of his columns.

When you read the 2002 version of this book, you get the feeling that some of the two-page sections have been recently updated and some not. Some reviewers have pointed out that a significant fraction of the book is about C and not C++. That was true of a lot of the early C++ books. One reviewer of the 1998 version complained about a bad inheritance example in which the base class was Course and the derived class was Student. In the 2002 version, there is an example in which a base class is Course and a derived class is Professor (multiple professors teaching different parts of the same course). I tend to agree with the complaint, in that we want inheritance to represent an "is a" relationship, while embedded or nested objects work on a "has a" relationship. Keogh's approach did work for his example, but he I think he could have easily fixed his problem with better naming. Still, I wouldn't trash the whole book for it.

Some people love this book because of the quick reference it provides. The encapsulation contributes to the reference value, since you can read one topic and get its message without having to go back through earlier sections to figure out what is going on. Others hate it because it's not a C++ purist's book and does, in fact, leave out some important C++ features (e.g., STL vectors) while including a lot of C features that are not heavily used by C++ programmers. Again, lots of early C++ books are that way, because the authors themselves were so steeped in their C backgrounds. They tend to write about how they personally do things instead of how a pure C++ programmer would do things. I agree that a book on C++ should focus on C++ and only cover the essential elements of C that C++ programmers typically rely on. (I personally get annoyed with Stroustrup's book because he often assumes the reader knows C. And Stroustrup's book is the last word on C++.)

The people who grade Notebook so highly are the ones using it for reference who've found clear answers quicker in it than in other books. My own position is that I like having Notebook on my shelf. It has already been valuable as a reference, and I'm just getting started with it. I've even found a few unexpected nuggets buried inside. (I only program in C++, never in C.) I wouldn't want to start out with this book, but it is a valuable resource for me.

I read many books while trying to learn c++ and I found the C++ programmer's notebook one of the best on the market. There are hundreds of little programs with each having callouts that point to syntax and tell you what's happening. You don't have to read pages and pages of text to understand how to use c++. This book gives you c++ programs in a "picture" like way. More book should be written this way.

Finally someone has come up with an approach to learning c++ that matches the way programmers like me learn. I simply lookup the functionality I need; look at complete, working sample code that contains the functionality, then read the callouts that point to each keyword and tells me what it does. There's also
sufficient text to further explain the rules. I found what I needed within seconds. Great job!

As the title clearly says, it is a "notebook". It is not a "101 Learn C++" book but a good "notebook" for quick and dirty referencing. I like the layout that the text is
on the left and the digrams/codes on the right.

I have this book handy in my office for my work. It is a good notebook for a programmer when one has forgotten the syntax or simply a reference. I have to mention
that it also has some C flavours in addition to C++.

I recommend this book as a handy small notebook in the office.

All the best!

This book can be a good addition to your C++ library. But, you will need a good C++ programming book which explains contents of this book in more details. This book does have good examples but what good are the examples if they are not explained very well.

I recommend getting:

The C++ Programming Language Special Edition
by Bjarne Stroustrup with this book.

With so many c++ books on the market, not one explains c++ the way programmers like to lean. At least until now. I found this book a well worth addition to my library. You lookup the functionality you want, then look at a fully working - short - program showing how to code the functionality. Best of all the authors use callouts to describe every aspect of the syntax. I really like the programmer's notebook style.

I thought it was a great book but....., now I am very sad. I do not think the author knows enough about C++. If you want to confuse C and C++, and write some awful codes, get this book.