Visual C++ .NET 2003

D36f7dd36afda3287a2046a97bcf2dae
0
Herculezz 101 Sep 10, 2005 at 19:35

What Book Would You Guys Recommend for The Absolute Beginner For Visual C++ .NET 2003?

9 Replies

Please log in or register to post a reply.

75c2c31bcca10ef21a86d5f5f49279d2
0
Tufty 101 Sep 10, 2005 at 23:19

@Herculezz

What Book Would You Guys Recommend for The Absolute Beginner For Visual C++ .NET 2003? [snapback]21103[/snapback]

Pretty much any book that covers standard C++. The interface of Visual C++ you will pick up in time anyway, and most books give you at least a quick coverage of how to set compiler options and the like for VC++.

As for the rest of it, it depends what you want to do with it once you’ve got the basics down.

D36f7dd36afda3287a2046a97bcf2dae
0
Herculezz 101 Sep 11, 2005 at 05:58

ok makes sense learn c++ before learning visual c++! ok so whats the best book (in your opinion) for a beginner to learn c++? for dummies? sams? ms step by step? c++ bible?

0b83579339e6702d22ee9d6e776f7bfc
0
nullterm 101 Sep 11, 2005 at 07:02

C++ for Dummies is a great way to learn the language for the first time. It’s how I learned the language 8+ years ago.

One suggestion I have is to learn C first (C for Dummies) because it is a simpler subset of C++, and give you two perspectives on how to program: functional and object-oriented. Experience with lower level languages is always handy, if not always used.

25bbd22b0b17f557748f601922880554
0
bramz 101 Sep 11, 2005 at 11:20

@nullterm

One suggestion I have is to learn C first (C for Dummies) because it is a simpler subset of C++, and give you two perspectives on how to program: functional and object-oriented. Experience with lower level languages is always handy, if not always used. [snapback]21122[/snapback]

I disagree. It is not only unnecessary to learn C first, it’s even dangerous. Because many people who enter the world of C++ with a C background keep generating C-style code in C++. As the C++ faq says it ( http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/how-…p.html#faq-28.2 ):

Should I learn C before I learn OO/C++?
Don’t bother.

If your ultimate goal is to learn OO/C++ and you don’t already know C, reading books or taking courses in C will not only waste your time, but it will teach you a bunch of things that you’ll explicitly have to un-learn when you finally get back on track and learn OO/C++ (e.g., malloc(), printf(), unnecessary use of switch statements, error-code exception handling, unnecessary use of #define macros, etc.).

If you want to learn OO/C++, learn OO/C++. Taking time out to learn C will waste your time and confuse you.

Keeping a mix with prodecural programming in C++ is indeed still important (that’s probably what you meant with functional programming?) but there’s nothing that prevents that when learning C++. Many sources will explicitely state that a function that doesn’t belong in a class, shouldn’t be in a class.

Knowledge with lower language comes indeed handy in the long run, but IMO that’s knowledge that can come later on. Get started first, get specialized later.

Bramz

25bbd22b0b17f557748f601922880554
0
bramz 101 Sep 11, 2005 at 11:31

@Herculezz

ok makes sense learn c++ before learning visual c++! ok so whats the best book (in your opinion) for a beginner to learn c++? for dummies? sams? ms step by step? c++ bible? [snapback]21121[/snapback]

Visual C++ = C/C++ compiler by microsoft. So, learning C++ is learning how to program in the language C++. Learning Visual C++ is learning how to work with a program. Quite a difference there :)

75c2c31bcca10ef21a86d5f5f49279d2
0
Tufty 101 Sep 11, 2005 at 13:46

@bramz

@Herculezz

ok makes sense learn c++ before learning visual c++! ok so whats the best book (in your opinion) for a beginner to learn c++? for dummies? sams? ms step by step? c++ bible? [snapback]21121[/snapback]

Visual C++ = C/C++ compiler by microsoft. So, learning C++ is learning how to program in the language C++. Learning Visual C++ is learning how to work with a program. Quite a difference there :)

[snapback]21127[/snapback]

Agreed, a significant difference.

Definitely don’t learn C first. That’s the path my university course takes, and it’s proven to be harmful to the learning process - half the people who have progressed with me onto the object-oriented C++ side are still confused about classes and the like. Learn object-oriented stuff from the start, you’ll generate cleaner code that makes more sense.

As far as Visual C++ goes, you’ll pick it up easily enough. In some ways you’ll find it easier to learn, because it protects you from a lot of the stuff behind the scenes that people using manual command-line compilers have to do by themselves (linking and such).

Cd577ee1cb56aa2ad5645b7daa0a2830
0
eddie 101 Oct 28, 2005 at 17:36

@nullterm

One suggestion I have is to learn C first (C for Dummies) because it is a simpler subset of C++, and give you two perspectives on how to program: functional and object-oriented. Experience with lower level languages is always handy, if not always used.

Sorry nullterm, I don’t mean to pick on you, but I thought I’d just clarify something…. but first… ( :) )

… I agree with the others that learning C is not necessarily the best path to learning C++… More importantly, it seems like Bjarne himself is of a similar mind (taken from http://www.research.att.com/\~bs/bs_faq.html#prerequisite)::)

Knowing C is a prerequisite for learning C++, right? Wrong. The common subset of C and C++ is easier to learn than C. There will be less type errors to catch manually (the C++ type system is stricter and more expressive), fewer tricks to learn (C++ allows you to express more things without circumlocution), and better libraries available. The best initial subset of C++ to learn is not “all of C”.

While it doesn’t completely jive with what I’m saying, it does imply that if you’re wanting to learn C++, you might have a hard time weeding out the parts of C you’re learning that are relevant to C++.

As to the one correction I wanted to make; C is not truly a functional language. It’s a procedural/imperative language. Functional languages are languages such as ERlang, Lisp, etc.

It’s easily confused (I’ve done it), as we think of writing functions as being ‘functional’ and we confuse the language type with it.

For a better explanation than I could ever give, check up on the Wikipedia articles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_programming

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperative_programming

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_programming

Cheers!

Your-Friendly-Neighbourhood-Pedant,

-e-

4dd3c4020d2b5d114a7d6f6a5682604b
0
sachinmahanin 101 Nov 12, 2005 at 07:34

Hi ,
Can anyone send me some e-books on vc++.net 2003 managed extensions or can send me url from where i can download the books.

Thanks,
Sachin
sachinmahanin@yahoo.com

340bf64ac6abda6e40f7e860279823cb
0
_oisyn 101 Nov 12, 2005 at 16:56

The MSDN library is very rich in information, it will tell you most things you’ll need to know about managed c++. If you’re looking for a tutorial, just type “managed c++ tutorial” in google.

But I don’t think learning managed C++ is a good choice. Visual C++ 8 was recently released, and with it the whole managed C++ syntax changed (in fact it’s now called C++/CLI). So if you’re interested in writing .Net applications in C++ in the future, get your hands on a Visual C++ 2005 express edition, and learn C++/CLI ;)