Connecting Tech Pros Worldwide Forums | Help | Site Map

Why Deitel's book should be bad?

nembo kid
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
#1: Jul 6 '08
According to accu.org, Deitel's "How to program" is not reccomended.

I don't agree. I have the 3rd ed. and I find it ok.

What do you think about this book?

Thanks in advance.

Ivan Novick
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
#2: Jul 6 '08

re: Why Deitel's book should be bad?


On Jul 6, 5:53 am, nembo kid <nembo@kidwrote:
Quote:
According to accu.org, Deitel's "How to program" is not reccomended.
>
I don't agree. I have the 3rd ed. and I find it ok.
>
What do you think about this book?
>
Thanks in advance.
Its totally fine. There are some other highly recommended books out
there like Stroustrup 's which are bit more respected by industry
veterans.

Regards,
Ivan Novick
http://www.mycppquiz.com
Default User
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
#3: Jul 6 '08

re: Why Deitel's book should be bad?


nembo kid wrote:
Quote:
According to accu.org, Deitel's "How to program" is not reccomended.
>
I don't agree. I have the 3rd ed. and I find it ok.
The very first line of the review:

"What strikes me most about this book is that, in contrast to many
other texts revised or written after the release of the latest
standard, Deitel and Deitel appear to have made no effort to update
their material to reflect the new standard."


That right there should be an automatic not recommended in almost
anyone's review. Why would you not want to learn standard C++?





Brian

Pete Becker
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
#4: Jul 6 '08

re: Why Deitel's book should be bad?


On 2008-07-06 16:14:35 -0400, "Default User" <defaultuserbr@yahoo.comsaid:
Quote:
nembo kid wrote:
>
Quote:
>According to accu.org, Deitel's "How to program" is not reccomended.
>>
>I don't agree. I have the 3rd ed. and I find it ok.
>
The very first line of the review:
>
"What strikes me most about this book is that, in contrast to many
other texts revised or written after the release of the latest
standard, Deitel and Deitel appear to have made no effort to update
their material to reflect the new standard."
>
>
That right there should be an automatic not recommended in almost
anyone's review. Why would you not want to learn standard C++?
>
That review is three editions out of date.

--
Pete
Roundhouse Consulting, Ltd. (www.versatilecoding.com) Author of "The
Standard C++ Library Extensions: a Tutorial and Reference
(www.petebecker.com/tr1book)

Jerry Coffin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
#5: Jul 7 '08

re: Why Deitel's book should be bad?


In article <4870beef$0$18153$4fafbaef@reader3.news.tin.it>, nembo@kid
says...
Quote:
According to accu.org, Deitel's "How to program" is not reccomended.
>
I don't agree. I have the 3rd ed. and I find it ok.
>
What do you think about this book?
The 3rd edition is pretty old. I was at the bookstore today, however,
and took a look at the current (6th) edition of the same book. I
certainly didn't try to read the whole thing (well over 1000 pages) but
glancing through bits and pieces for 15 or 20 minutes did not leave a
particularly good impression. While better (for example) than any of the
Herbert Schildt books I've looked at, what I looked at wasn't exactly
great either. In almost every H.S. book I've glanced through, you could
open to a more or less random page and find at least one thing that was
clearly _wrong_. In this book I wouldn't say I saw anything that was
clearly wrong but a fair amount of what I saw wasn't particularly
_right_ either. The precepts of the examples weren't particularly
realistic, and the designs of the example classes were mediocre (at
least the ones I glanced at, which included a string class, a date class
and a hierarchy for employees, including derived classes for salaried
and commissioned employees).

While I wouldn't really recommend _against_ it, I think there are
substantially better books such as Francis Glassborrow's books for rank
beginners, and Accelerated C++ for anybody with prior experience. If
you're looking for a good book, there are better ways to spend your
money -- but if you already have it, you could do worse than reading it
and doing the exercises.

--
Later,
Jerry.

The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
Default User
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
#6: Jul 7 '08

re: Why Deitel's book should be bad?


Pete Becker wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-07-06 16:14:35 -0400, "Default User"
<defaultuserbr@yahoo.comsaid:
>
Quote:
nembo kid wrote:
Quote:
According to accu.org, Deitel's "How to program" is not
reccomended.
>
I don't agree. I have the 3rd ed. and I find it ok.
Quote:
Quote:
That right there should be an automatic not recommended in almost
anyone's review. Why would you not want to learn standard C++?
>
That review is three editions out of date.

But it's the one the OP asked about.



Brian
Diego Martins
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
#7: Jul 7 '08

re: Why Deitel's book should be bad?


On Jul 6, 6:02*pm, Pete Becker <p...@versatilecoding.comwrote:
Quote:
On 2008-07-06 16:14:35 -0400, "Default User" <defaultuse...@yahoo.comsaid:
>
>
>
Quote:
nembo kid wrote:
>
Quote:
Quote:
According to accu.org, Deitel's "How to program" is not reccomended.
>
Quote:
Quote:
I don't agree. I have the 3rd ed. and I find it ok.
>
Quote:
The very first line of the review:
>
Quote:
"What strikes me most about this book is that, in contrast to many
other texts revised or written after the release of the latest
standard, Deitel and Deitel appear to have made no effort to update
their material to reflect the new standard."
>
Quote:
That right there should be an automatic not recommended in almost
anyone's review. Why would you not want to learn standard C++?
>
That review is three editions out of date.
and it is the most f***ing bloated book I've seen ever!

all Deitel books follow that heavy style :(
Closed Thread


Similar C / C++ bytes