Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!vsi1!octopus!sjsumcs!horstman
From: horstman@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Cay Horstmann)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Starting on C++
Message-ID: <1990May2.024942.1374@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu>
Date: 2 May 90 02:49:42 GMT
References: <4403@mit-caf.MIT.EDU> <6170017@hpindda.HP.COM>
Reply-To: horstman@sjsumcs.SJSU.EDU (Cay Horstmann)
Organization: San Jose State University
Lines: 36

In article <6170017@hpindda.HP.COM> hardin@hpindda.HP.COM (John Hardin) writes:
>> Do not buy 'Ira Pohl's` Book.
>> 
>> --
>> Bharat
>> ----------
>
>I beg to differ.  Would you mind posting some reasons for this opinion?
>I found Ira Pohl's book to be an excellent introduction to the language.
>It's short, to the point, and clearly written.  Anyone trying to learn
>C++ who finds themselves confused by the the book(s) they have would be
>well advised to go out and pick up a copy of Pohl's book.
>
Can't disagree with that. The book has so little information that it
can hardly confuse anyone. 

There really is very little there. Look at the "stock broker" example
in chapter 1. It is hard to conceive of a more pitiful example for
derived classes or virtual functions. Look at the aptly named "BStree."
Or look at the incredibly dumb discussion of assignment to this. Either
do it right or don't do it. (There is a lot to be said for the latter 
approach, with version 2, of course.) 

The book introduces the MECHANICS of SOME constructs of C++. I found it
disappointingly short on IDEAS. 

Disclaimer: I am writing a C++ text myself, soon to be published by Wiley. 
So it is in my interest to say terrible things about other C++ books.
Here goes: Pohl's book is bad. ALL other C++ books are bad. BUY MINE! :->

Seriously, I would recommend Lippman's book. It is a much better reference
than Pohl's. For an intuitive introduction, I like Eckel's book. It has
some nice sections (e.g. when to use references) that ease the transition
C->C++.

Cay