Accelerated C++

Now that I'm done with school I finally have some time to sit and re-learn C++. The last time I did any substantial programming with the language was during an internship back in 2007. To help me in this task, I've decided to read a book, which I feel is the most conformable way of learning things for me.

Since I already know a large portion of the syntax, and semantics I wanted to pick a book that didn't delve into beginning territory, and instead focused on people who already know how to program but want to learn the C++ language quickly. Most of the time, the type of books that cater to programmers are titled "Pro" for example "Professional C#," etc. The reason I'm avoiding books such as C++ Primer Plus, Beginning C++, C++ in 21 days and others like them is not because they are bad, but because too much time is spent explaining the fundamentals of programming, not to mention that some of these tomes are 1000+ pages long.

There is one very popular and well reviewed book for C++ that has stood the test of time due to its unique approach of teaching the language: Accelerated C++. It covers just as much material as other beginners books and doesn't spend hundreds of pages teaching how to use a for loop. My goal is to read and do all the exercises in the book by August 15 of this year.

In the last two weeks I've read the first 4 chapters and I'm still working my way through the exercises in Section 3. What I'm finding is that searching for the solutions online has shown that only a few people have posted them, but not for the entire book. So I thought it would be a cool idea to post all the solutions here in my blog as I work my way through each chapter. Perhaps it will give me a little more motivation to read the book in its entirety, and some people will find it useful to see how I approached each exercise.

Java sucks?

An interesting story from CrossTalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering and reported on Joels on Software's blog has a few controversial statements.

First, both the journal and Joel agree that Java is not a good choice for a first programming language at universities. Second, Joel mentions that there should be a separate college degree for programming, for those kids that don't want to deal with the more theoretical aspects of Computer Science. He also calls programming an art and as such the degree these kids get should be a Bachelors of Fine Arts.

While I agree that programming can be considered an art form, I do not share the same feelings toward Java "dumbing down the curriculum" and the comment about the BFA degree. Java does hide many of the low-level details such as pointers and direct memory manipulation when compared to C/C++. However, Java is a modern programming language. It was designed to not use those features and to make it easier on programmers to get their job done. Depending on what you are working on that might be a benefit or a problem. But the same thing can be said about C and C++. And any degree dealing with programming should be a Science degree: Bachelors of Science, etc.

The other comments in Joel's blog basically boil down to never-ending battle between Computer Science vs Software Engineering. Both disciplines are necessary, but I tend to fall in the CS camp. Without the theory behind computers how do we expect to come up with the next "big thing." Google was made because of the theory behind graphs, not because of the low-level details of the implementing language. Lastly, most universities these days offer enough programming electives for students to focus on their interests.

Undergraduate programming - Joel on Software blog.
Where are the the Software Engineers of tomorrow - CrossTalk