Teach yourself C++

junjun · Post by **junjun** » 21 May 2007, 21:35

Hi Guys

For anyone who is Interested in Learning C++ , take a look at this.
http://newdata.box.sk/bx/c/

junjun · Post by **junjun** » 27 May 2007, 19:53

HI ppl

Did anybody try this as yet ? seems to be quite good if you looking to break into Programming, well let me know what you guys think.

DarkRanger · Post by **DarkRanger** » 27 May 2007, 20:03

Haven't tried it yet... Will make a PDF from it tomorrow and try it at home... Thanks!

Hman · Post by **Hman** » 28 May 2007, 07:41

I've spidered the site, I'll try it sometime.

Post by **Anthro** » 28 May 2007, 09:58

Guys watch out for .box.sk sites.. generally not the best to go looking at - i WAS HACKED on them, and no I was not stupid, my firewall was compromised

thealluseless · Post by **thealluseless** » 28 May 2007, 10:40

also if u interested in learning c++, i found the Sams teach ur self books pretty damn good, sometimes a little long winded and such, but definitely a great asset to have.

Cure · Post by **Cure** » 09 Jun 2007, 10:44

Guess teach yourself books are really usefull, the only problem is I don't have the personal disipline, I do a few chapter and then decide its boring, but if you have the motivation it could be really good.
I mostly just look for interesting code snippets on the internet.

Neon948 · Post by **Neon948** » 09 Jun 2007, 14:39

VB Rules.

rustypup · Post by **rustypup** » 09 Jun 2007, 17:25

Neon948 wrote:VB Rules.

thank you for that.

i feel my life has been enriched beyond measure....

PHR33K · Post by **PHR33K** » 09 Jun 2007, 18:28

Neon948 wrote:VB Rules.

... yes, for people who cant code.

To quote Edsger Dijkstra:

It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

Cure · Post by **Cure** » 11 Jun 2007, 09:39

Come on thats BASIC, VISUAL BASICS diffrent

But yeah vb does teach you a little sloppy coding but it's not that bad.

Hex_Rated · Post by **Hex_Rated** » 11 Jun 2007, 10:51

PHR33K wrote:
Neon948 wrote:VB Rules.
... yes, for people who cant code.

To quote Edsger Dijkstra:
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

lol. Is there any programmer that hasn't had exposure to BASIC at some level? Some more:

The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be regarded as a criminal offence.

FORTRAN --"the infantile disorder"--, by now nearly 20 years old, is hopelessly inadequate for whatever computer application you have in mind today: it is now too clumsy, too risky, and too expensive to use.

thealluseless wrote:also if u interested in learning c++, i found the Sams teach ur self books pretty damn good, sometimes a little long winded and such, but definitely a great asset to have.

The link is actually a SAMS teach yourself book that's been transcripted to a ebook web page. If you want O'Reilly ebooks, check out:

http://rodrickbrown.com/docs/oreilly/

PHR33K · Post by **PHR33K** » 11 Jun 2007, 14:13

I've NEVER used basic

Hex_Rated · Post by **Hex_Rated** » 11 Jun 2007, 14:21

Contrary to what Mr. Dijkstra would have you believe, that's not necessarily a good thing.

PHR33K · Post by **PHR33K** » 11 Jun 2007, 14:37

Its by pure choice as well - in highschool they wanted me to do VB.NET - I handed all my projects in; done in FASM

Hex_Rated · Post by **Hex_Rated** » 11 Jun 2007, 14:46

You are mad...

If I was your teacher I would have given you 0 for not following instructions.

I also prefer to stay away from VB, it's just not always possible. But I believe that Dijkstra was referring to classical BASIC, which is a completely different language compared to today's BASIC variants which follow the philosophy of true OO languages.

He was mainly critical of GOSUB and GOTO keywords. With good reason.

PHR33K · Post by **PHR33K** » 11 Jun 2007, 14:58

GOTO is fine - if you know what youre doing. its no different to an unconditional 5 byte jump.

Hman · Post by **Hman** » 11 Jun 2007, 15:05

Hey, I did some BASIC back in the day.

StarPhoenix · Post by **StarPhoenix** » 11 Jun 2007, 15:07

<ot>
Very well.....so.....
Which languages a)Are fairly easy to learn
b)Do not teach one bad habits
c)Have a free compiler/interpreter

I have a point to prove to someone

So as not to disrupt this thread any further, please pm your answer to me.
Thank you
</ot>

thealluseless · Post by **thealluseless** » 11 Jun 2007, 15:08

we were always taught goto statements were the root of all evil, i have yet to use one(except for assembler

), although its been freakin tempting

Hex_Rated · Post by **Hex_Rated** » 11 Jun 2007, 15:12

GOTO statements are the root of all evil. You can't write assembler code without using them. When your code is compiled into machine code, rest assured there will be the assembler equivalent OPCodes (JNZ, JNE ... etc).

PHR33K · Post by **PHR33K** » 11 Jun 2007, 15:20

gosub is more equivelant to the JNZ, JNE, JZ, etc. Whilst GOTO is basicly JMP.

Supertwit: C. Dont learn C++ first as C++ is far more lenient. C demands you write good code - which becomes a habit.

UndaGrad · Post by **UndaGrad** » 11 Jun 2007, 15:28

I think classes are way better and neater than structs

Hex_Rated · Post by **Hex_Rated** » 11 Jun 2007, 15:31

gosub is more equivelant to the JNZ, JNE, JZ, etc. Whilst GOTO is basicly JMP.

No. GOSUB was used in very old BASIC. It is an unconditional jump as well. JNZ, JNE, JZ, JE, etc are all conditional. Used when you had to define the line number for each line of code.

eg:

10 GOSUB MYSUB
20 PRINT "Hello 1"
30 SUB MYSUB
40 PRINT "Hello 2"
50 RETURN
55 REM or was it END SUB? Can't remember
60 PRINT "Hello 3"

Would generate
Hello 2
Hello 1
Hello 2
Hello 3

IIRC. This was the state of BASIC programming in Dijkstra's day. Which is probably why he condemned it.

PHR33K · Post by **PHR33K** » 11 Jun 2007, 15:35

heh . Like I said, Ive never used basic :S