struggling with pointers, OOD and C++

[arnuld]

[ this post was started from "comp.object" titled "struggling with
Design-Paradigms" but witht he help of Daniel T. it drifted towards a
meaningful path to learn C++. i was helped, so to help other newbies,
i am posting it here :-) ]

thanks

[arnuld]

[posted by "arnuld"]
hai all,

1st of all, thanks for the replies, to my earlier post, and now with
your help (the comp.object folks :-) the confusion has gone, i am
very clear on my goals but still i have some difficulties. i will be
brief:

i do understand the meaning of variables,objects,function as i have
done some Lisp, so i can say i am not a complete newbie. yes, i have
written some trivial programes too and i can understand books written
for programmers (like Programming Ruby) but cannot understand books
written for for much experienced programmers (like Stroustrup's TC++PL
3/e). since i have never done any professional coding at some company
so i consider myself a beginner.i want to go directly to OOD (without
learning any anything else like procedural paradigm or algorithms).

Is this right way?

i will be looking for a job using C++ but searching the archives of
this newsgroup tells me that is not a good idea. hence, is it OK to
go to through path:

OOA-D - OOP using Eiffel/Ruby - C++

?

thanks

[arnuld]

[posted by "Daniel T."]

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit....html#faq-28.3

[arnuld]

[posted by arnuld]

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit....html#faq-28.3

Daniel, i read that and that is not working for me :-(
i am trying to learn C++ since Nov, 2006. it has been 3 months since
then and i am not even able to understand the Desk calculator program
in chapter 6. i discussed it at "comp.lang.c++" and that did not work
for me. when i tried to understand "Structures" in section 5.7, i hit
with "pointers to char", totally out of my head :-(, and i have only
tried to learn the procedural aspect of C++, the "class concept" never
made any sense to me, so i always avoided it in C++. i think one can
not learn C++ directly, one needs to understand "pointers" (may be
"structures" too) & "OOD" before he jumps to C++.

BTW, it was quite a good moment when i saw the "C++ FAQ" link. you are
still trying to help, nice Daniel T

:-)

[arnuld]

-- [posted by "Daniel T."] ----

[posted by arnuld]

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit....html#faq-28.3

Daniel, i read that and that is not working for me :-(

i am trying to learn C++ since Nov, 2006. it has been 3 months since
then and i am not even able to understand the Desk calculator program
in chapter 6. i discussed it at "comp.lang.c++" and that did not work
for me. when i tried to understand "Structures" in section 5.7, i hit
with "pointers to char", totally out of my head :-(, and i have only
tried to learn the procedural aspect of C++, the "class concept" never
made any sense to me, so i always avoided it in C++. i think one can
not learn C++ directly, one needs to understand "pointers" (may be
"structures" too) & "OOD" before he jumps to C++.

Please understand, the concept of pointers are almost unique to C and C
++, all other languages hide them behind some sort of abstraction. So
the very thing you are having the most trouble with is the thing that
has nothing to do with OOD.

When I first started learning C++, I already knew C (thus I understood
pointers and structures.) Despite that fact, it still took me 3 months
of solid study before I could even begin to understand OO Design. It's
a huge complex topic.

I believe that you will find it impossible to learn OO Design unless
you have a solid understanding of a particular language to express
designs in. If your goal is to learn C++, then that is the language
you should work on. If your goal is to learn OO Design, then you can
certainly learn any of several languages, but your designs will come
out different than they would in C++, and as the FAQ says, there will
be must to unlearn.

BTW, I would not call Stroustrup's book "advanced" but it is succinct.
I wouldn't recommend it for someone trying to learn the language
without a tutor or mentor of some sort.

I have often tutored people through email and IM. If you would like,
send me an email and maybe I can help you work through the book. If
you do send me an email, be sure to put the word "sheltie" in the
subject or my spam filter will trash it.

[arnuld]

-- [posted by "Daniel T."] --

[posted by arnuld]

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit....html#faq-28.3

Daniel, i read that and that is not working for me :-(

i am trying to learn C++ since Nov, 2006. it has been 3 months since
then and i am not even able to understand the Desk calculator program
in chapter 6. i discussed it at "comp.lang.c++" and that did not work
for me. when i tried to understand "Structures" in section 5.7, i hit
with "pointers to char", totally out of my head :-(, and i have only
tried to learn the procedural aspect of C++, the "class concept" never
made any sense to me, so i always avoided it in C++. i think one can
not learn C++ directly, one needs to understand "pointers" (may be
"structures" too) & "OOD" before he jumps to C++.

BTW, it was quite a good moment when i saw the "C++ FAQ" link. you are
still trying to help, nice Daniel T

:-)

Please understand, the concept of pointers are almost unique to C and C
++, all other languages hide them behind some sort of abstraction. So
the very thing you are having the most trouble with is the thing that
has nothing to do with OOD.

When I first started learning C++, I already knew C (thus I understood
pointers and structures.) Despite that fact, it still took me 3 months
of solid study before I could even begin to understand OO Design. It's
a huge complex topic.

I believe that you will find it impossible to learn OO Design unless
you have a solid understanding of a particular language to express
designs in. If your goal is to learn C++, then that is the language
you should work on. If your goal is to learn OO Design, then you can
certainly learn any of several languages, but your designs will come
out different than they would in C++, and as the FAQ says, there will
be must to unlearn.

BTW, I would not call Stroustrup's book "advanced" but it is succinct.
I wouldn't recommend it for someone trying to learn the language
without a tutor or mentor of some sort.

I have often tutored people through email and IM. If you would like,
send me an email and maybe I can help you work through the book. If
you do send me an email, be sure to put the word "sheltie" in the
subject or my spam filter will trash it.

[arnuld]

[posted by "arnuld"]

hai Daniel,

as you said, that i can send you an email, for tutoring me. so, i am
writing this to you:

i have downloaded an "illegal .chm" version of Accelerated C++ as this
book is not available in my country :-( & will be very expensive for
me to buy from amazon or blackwell etc.

BTW, "Accelerted C++" (ACPP) makes sense to me :-) i can understand
it.

Please understand, the concept of pointers are almost unique to C and
C++, all other languages hide them behind some sort of abstraction.

you literally gave me an electric-shock by saying this. i learnt Lisp
before and i know, Lisp compiles to assembly code directly, unlike
Eiffel.

does Lisp also hides pointers?

if it is true, then it will be an eye opening experience for me.

So the very thing you are having the most trouble with is the thing that
has nothing to do with OOD.

When I first started learning C++, I already knew C (thus I understood
pointers and structures.) Despite that fact, it still took me 3 months
of solid study before I could even begin to understand OO Design. It's a
huge complex topic.

1. in my case, what to do with pointers?

2. you say my problem has nothing to do with OOD and then you say, for
you, it took 3 months of solid study before you started to understand
OOD. you also say it is huge complex topic.
so i guess, i have choose this path:

pointers/struct in C++ - an OOD book with C++

(OOD book e.g Booch/Rubaugh/page-Jones etc.)

right?

I believe that you will find it impossible to learn OO Design unless you
have a solid understanding of a particular language to express designs
in.

ok, i seem to agree and when you make classes, whether in C++ or Lisp,
they do not make any sense to me. i could write the same program by
breaking it into functions making it easier to understand (though the
program will be larger in code-size, sometimes, not all of the times)

If your goal is to learn C++, then that is the language you should
work on. If your goal is to learn OO Design, then you can certainly
learn any of several languages, but your designs will come out different
than they would in C++, and as the FAQ says, there will be must to
unlearn.

i know & learning path will be "a long time". id o not want to do
that, how can you help me?

BTW, I would not call Stroustrup's book "advanced" but it is succinct. I
wouldn't recommend it for someone trying to learn the language without a
tutor or mentor of some sort.

ok, as i said, ACPP is working for me

I have often tutored people through email and IM. If you would like,
send me an email and maybe I can help you work through the book. If you
do send me an email, be sure to put the word "sheltie" in the subject or
my spam filter will trash it.

that is why i sent you this email
--
http://arnuld.blogspot.com/

[Dave Rahardja]

On 12 Feb 2007 02:41:46 -0800, "arnuld" <ge*********@gmail.comwrote:

>i have downloaded an "illegal .chm" version of Accelerated C++ as this
book is not available in my country :-( & will be very expensive for
me to buy from amazon or blackwell etc.

BTW, "Accelerted C++" (ACPP) makes sense to me :-) i can understand
it.

I would also recommend the following FREE resource for learning C++. The
entire book is available on the web.

http://www.mindview.net/Books/TICPP/...ngInCPP2e.html

-dr

[arnuld]

I would also recommend the following FREE resource for learning C++. The

entire book is available on the web.

http://www.mindview.net/Books/TICPP/...ngInCPP2e.html

thanks and i have a hard-copy of that. trust me, Eckel uses heavy C to
teach C++, NO nothing wrong with that, actually, he uses C to explain
the difference with C++, the most clearly presented difference i have
ever seen but i do not know C :-(

[Grizlyk]

arnuld wrote:

>
Please understand, the concept of pointers are almost unique to C and C
++, all other languages hide them behind some sort of abstraction. So
the very thing you are having the most trouble with is the thing that
has nothing to do with OOD.

"pascal" has pointers, and even introducing "forward type reference" in
order to make lists and other basic structures with the help of pointers.

--
Maksim A. Polyanin

"In thi world of fairy tales rolls are liked olso"
/Gnume/

[nw]

i have downloaded an "illegal .chm" version of Accelerated C++ as this

book is not available in my country :-( & will be very expensive for
me to buy from amazon or blackwell etc.

BTW, "Accelerted C++" (ACPP) makes sense to me :-) i can understand
it.

I found Accelerated C++ to be a excellent book. Work your way through
it and it should giving you a solid grounding in C++.