467,161 Members | 952 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
Ask Question

Home New Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 467,161 developers. It's quick & easy.

Lippman's Inside the C++ Object Model?

This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for everybody.
Different people think differently. I often stumble where others don't.
And I often stroll through what others find hard. I am wondering if people
who have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_ believe it improved
their ability to write C++ code.

Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?
--
p->m == (*p).m == p[0].m
http://www.kdevelop.org
http://www.suse.com
http://www.mozilla.org
Jul 22 '05 #1
  • viewed: 3183
Share:
12 Replies

"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote in message
news:8c********************@speakeasy.net...
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for everybody.
Different people think differently. I often stumble where others don't.
And I often stroll through what others find hard. I am wondering if people who have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_ believe it improved
their ability to write C++ code.


I haven't read the book, but I know for sure that as a former C programmer
it definitely helped me to translate C++ constructs into the equivalent C.
I'm thinking particularly of virtual functions and multiple inheritance. In
fact I would go as far as to say it was when I understood how these two are
implemented in C terms that the penny dropped and I really began to progress
in C++. I've gone past that phase now and I can 'think in C++' but it
definitely helped during the transition.

john
Jul 22 '05 #2

"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote in message
news:8c********************@speakeasy.net...
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for everybody.
Different people think differently. I often stumble where others don't.
And I often stroll through what others find hard. I am wondering if people who have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_ believe it improved
their ability to write C++ code.


I haven't read the book, but I know for sure that as a former C programmer
it definitely helped me to translate C++ constructs into the equivalent C.
I'm thinking particularly of virtual functions and multiple inheritance. In
fact I would go as far as to say it was when I understood how these two are
implemented in C terms that the penny dropped and I really began to progress
in C++. I've gone past that phase now and I can 'think in C++' but it
definitely helped during the transition.

john
Jul 22 '05 #3
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for
everybody. Different people think differently. I often
stumble where others don't. And I often stroll through
what others find hard. I am wondering if people who have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_ believe it improved their ability to write C++ code.

Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?
--
p->m == (*p).m == p[0].m
http://www.kdevelop.org
http://www.suse.com
http://www.mozilla.org

Jul 22 '05 #4
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for
everybody. Different people think differently. I often
stumble where others don't. And I often stroll through
what others find hard. I am wondering if people who have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_ believe it improved their ability to write C++ code.

Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?
--
p->m == (*p).m == p[0].m
http://www.kdevelop.org
http://www.suse.com
http://www.mozilla.org

Jul 22 '05 #5
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for
everybody. Different people think differently. I often
stumble where others don't. And I often stroll through
what others find hard. I am wondering if people who
have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_
believe it improved their ability to write C++ code.
There would be something seriously wrong with anyone who acquired new
knowledge about C++ without synthesizing it into better programming
practices. I don't think anyone, regardless of the depth of their
experience, could walk away from "Inside the C++ Object Model" without at
least one new insight on C++, and that alone should be enough to improve
their coding.
Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?


That's subjective. I couldn't put it down, but I've given up on alleged
page-turners from Anne Rice and Stephen King after a couple of interminable
chapters.

Claudio Puviani
Jul 22 '05 #6
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for
everybody. Different people think differently. I often
stumble where others don't. And I often stroll through
what others find hard. I am wondering if people who
have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_
believe it improved their ability to write C++ code.
There would be something seriously wrong with anyone who acquired new
knowledge about C++ without synthesizing it into better programming
practices. I don't think anyone, regardless of the depth of their
experience, could walk away from "Inside the C++ Object Model" without at
least one new insight on C++, and that alone should be enough to improve
their coding.
Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?


That's subjective. I couldn't put it down, but I've given up on alleged
page-turners from Anne Rice and Stephen King after a couple of interminable
chapters.

Claudio Puviani
Jul 22 '05 #7
Claudio Puviani wrote:
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for
everybody. Different people think differently. I often
stumble where others don't. And I often stroll through
what others find hard. I am wondering if people who
have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_
believe it improved their ability to write C++ code.


There would be something seriously wrong with anyone who acquired new
knowledge about C++ without synthesizing it into better programming
practices. I don't think anyone, regardless of the depth of their
experience, could walk away from "Inside the C++ Object Model" without at
least one new insight on C++, and that alone should be enough to improve
their coding.
Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?


That's subjective. I couldn't put it down, but I've given up on alleged
page-turners from Anne Rice and Stephen King after a couple of
interminable chapters.

Claudio Puviani

Lippman's books are frequently recommended by experienced programmers. My
criteria for choosing Stroustrup over Lippman were 1) Stroustrup created
the language, 2) Stroustrup had cooler epigraphs. Actually, I didn't like
the print format off the one book I looked at. It felt like a sophomore
textbook. Probably a style that appeals to a majority, but not to me. As
you can tell, I used discerning reason to select my learning materials.

I did some checking on who Lippman is. Quite an interesting bird, he. Does
a lot of stuff that appeals to me, such as the movie graphics. I broke my
word about Koening and Moo being my last C++ book for the foreseeable
future. I just ordered Lippman's _Object Model_, and _C++ Templates: The
Complete Guide_, by Vandevoorde and Josuttis.
--
p->m == (*p).m == p[0].m
http://www.kdevelop.org
http://www.suse.com
http://www.mozilla.org
Jul 22 '05 #8
Claudio Puviani wrote:
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for
everybody. Different people think differently. I often
stumble where others don't. And I often stroll through
what others find hard. I am wondering if people who
have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_
believe it improved their ability to write C++ code.


There would be something seriously wrong with anyone who acquired new
knowledge about C++ without synthesizing it into better programming
practices. I don't think anyone, regardless of the depth of their
experience, could walk away from "Inside the C++ Object Model" without at
least one new insight on C++, and that alone should be enough to improve
their coding.
Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?


That's subjective. I couldn't put it down, but I've given up on alleged
page-turners from Anne Rice and Stephen King after a couple of
interminable chapters.

Claudio Puviani

Lippman's books are frequently recommended by experienced programmers. My
criteria for choosing Stroustrup over Lippman were 1) Stroustrup created
the language, 2) Stroustrup had cooler epigraphs. Actually, I didn't like
the print format off the one book I looked at. It felt like a sophomore
textbook. Probably a style that appeals to a majority, but not to me. As
you can tell, I used discerning reason to select my learning materials.

I did some checking on who Lippman is. Quite an interesting bird, he. Does
a lot of stuff that appeals to me, such as the movie graphics. I broke my
word about Koening and Moo being my last C++ book for the foreseeable
future. I just ordered Lippman's _Object Model_, and _C++ Templates: The
Complete Guide_, by Vandevoorde and Josuttis.
--
p->m == (*p).m == p[0].m
http://www.kdevelop.org
http://www.suse.com
http://www.mozilla.org
Jul 22 '05 #9
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote
Claudio Puviani wrote:
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for
everybody. Different people think differently. I often
stumble where others don't. And I often stroll through
what others find hard. I am wondering if people who
have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_
believe it improved their ability to write C++ code.
There would be something seriously wrong with anyone
who acquired new knowledge about C++ without
synthesizing it into better programming practices. I don't
think anyone, regardless of the depth of their experience,
could walk away from "Inside the C++ Object Model"
without at least one new insight on C++, and that alone
should be enough to improve their coding.
Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?


That's subjective. I couldn't put it down, but I've given up
on alleged page-turners from Anne Rice and Stephen King
after a couple of interminable chapters.

Claudio Puviani

Lippman's books are frequently recommended by experienced
programmers.


For good reasons. He's clear and thorough and he knows his stuff.
My criteria for choosing Stroustrup over Lippman were 1)
Stroustrup created the language, 2) Stroustrup had cooler
epigraphs. Actually, I didn't like the print format off the one
book I looked at. It felt like a sophomore textbook. Probably
a style that appeals to a majority, but not to me. As you can
tell, I used discerning reason to select my learning materials.
Why choose one over the other? You can't go wrong owning both and sometimes
what you don't understand immediately in one, the other clarifies.
I did some checking on who Lippman is. Quite an interesting
bird, he. Does a lot of stuff that appeals to me, such as the
movie graphics.
He was interesting even before going to work for Satan Disney.
I broke my word about Koening and Moo being my last C++
book for the foreseeable future. I just ordered Lippman's _Object
Model_
No C++ programmer should be without it.
, and _C++ Templates: The Complete Guide_, by Vandevoorde
and Josuttis.


Make sure you get Alexandrescu's "Modern C++ Design" as a complement. You'll
find yourself liberally flipping between the two.

Claudio Puviani
Jul 22 '05 #10
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote
Claudio Puviani wrote:
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for
everybody. Different people think differently. I often
stumble where others don't. And I often stroll through
what others find hard. I am wondering if people who
have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_
believe it improved their ability to write C++ code.
There would be something seriously wrong with anyone
who acquired new knowledge about C++ without
synthesizing it into better programming practices. I don't
think anyone, regardless of the depth of their experience,
could walk away from "Inside the C++ Object Model"
without at least one new insight on C++, and that alone
should be enough to improve their coding.
Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?


That's subjective. I couldn't put it down, but I've given up
on alleged page-turners from Anne Rice and Stephen King
after a couple of interminable chapters.

Claudio Puviani

Lippman's books are frequently recommended by experienced
programmers.


For good reasons. He's clear and thorough and he knows his stuff.
My criteria for choosing Stroustrup over Lippman were 1)
Stroustrup created the language, 2) Stroustrup had cooler
epigraphs. Actually, I didn't like the print format off the one
book I looked at. It felt like a sophomore textbook. Probably
a style that appeals to a majority, but not to me. As you can
tell, I used discerning reason to select my learning materials.
Why choose one over the other? You can't go wrong owning both and sometimes
what you don't understand immediately in one, the other clarifies.
I did some checking on who Lippman is. Quite an interesting
bird, he. Does a lot of stuff that appeals to me, such as the
movie graphics.
He was interesting even before going to work for Satan Disney.
I broke my word about Koening and Moo being my last C++
book for the foreseeable future. I just ordered Lippman's _Object
Model_
No C++ programmer should be without it.
, and _C++ Templates: The Complete Guide_, by Vandevoorde
and Josuttis.


Make sure you get Alexandrescu's "Modern C++ Design" as a complement. You'll
find yourself liberally flipping between the two.

Claudio Puviani
Jul 22 '05 #11
I found "Inside the C++ Object Model" to be indispensable for a deeper
understanding of the core language constructs of C++.
In my opinion a "must read" for anyone serious about C++.

An easy read? Definitely not.

Cheers,
Martin
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote in message
news:8c********************@speakeasy.net...
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for everybody.
Different people think differently. I often stumble where others don't.
And I often stroll through what others find hard. I am wondering if people who have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_ believe it improved
their ability to write C++ code.

Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?
--
p->m == (*p).m == p[0].m
http://www.kdevelop.org
http://www.suse.com
http://www.mozilla.org

Jul 22 '05 #12
I found "Inside the C++ Object Model" to be indispensable for a deeper
understanding of the core language constructs of C++.
In my opinion a "must read" for anyone serious about C++.

An easy read? Definitely not.

Cheers,
Martin
"Steven T. Hatton" <su******@setidava.kushan.aa> wrote in message
news:8c********************@speakeasy.net...
This is the kind of question that is hard to answer for everybody.
Different people think differently. I often stumble where others don't.
And I often stroll through what others find hard. I am wondering if people who have read Lippman's _Inside the C++ Object Model_ believe it improved
their ability to write C++ code.

Also. Is it a page-turner, or a challenge to get through?
--
p->m == (*p).m == p[0].m
http://www.kdevelop.org
http://www.suse.com
http://www.mozilla.org

Jul 22 '05 #13

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

11 posts views Thread by Steven T. Hatton | last post: by
15 posts views Thread by randyr | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by t | last post: by
reply views Thread by cincerite@gmail.com | last post: by
23 posts views Thread by tonytech08 | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.