Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!bonnie.concordia.ca!ganymede!clyde.concordia.ca!daily-planet.concordia.ca!rclark From: rclark@concour.cs.concordia.ca (CLARK richard) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re:Lippman's C++ Primer vs. Ellis' ARM SUMMARY Summary: summary of opinions gathered on the two books Keywords: C++, books, survey, summary, Lippman, Ellis, Stroustrup Message-ID: <543@daily-planet.concordia.ca> Date: 21 Jun 91 03:38:58 GMT Sender: usenet@daily-planet.concordia.ca Distribution: usa Organization: Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec Lines: 123 Hello all, I wasn't necessarily planning on posting the results of my survey, but I received so many fine answers that I felt I should share them. I've received numerous replies about my query which basically asked if the Annotated C++ Reference Manual was worth purchasing if I already owned Lippman's C++ Primer (which I considered to be quite complete, but again, it's the only C++ book I've read). I must thank this newsgroup for pointing out that book to me too. The reasons for asking were : 1) I felt I needed something a little more than the book by Lippman. It was sometimes hard to find exactly what I wanted, and I was running into problems coding, saying "Let me get this straight ..." I wanted to know if the ARM provided more information, or put it across differently. 2) I had seen numerous references to the ARM, but my computer bookstore didn't have it in stock - I would have to order it without seeing it. [As an aside, I've ordered "the ARM"] I would like to thank each of the respondants for the time and trouble it took to send me some information. They are (in no particular order) : Daniel A. Burkhard Russ Williams Frank Griswold Ron Schweikert Kim Coleman Gary Duzan J. W. Hargrove Stanley Friesen Steven Parkes Keith Walker Mike Oltz Mike Lijewski Robert Jacobs Amitabh Agrawal Philip Machanick Stephen Clamage Randy Hudson Paul Lyon Gary L. Randolph Michael Cox Jamshid Afshar Joe Pillera Bob Brazile Martin Hitz marty hoffmann Matt Mahoney SUMMARY : A large majority considered the "Annotated C++ Reference Manual" by Ellis and Stroustrup to be _the_ definitive source for information on C++, and that it contained information in a format much easier to find than in the book by Lippman because it was in reference manual format (which is natural, Lippman's book is a tutorial). The ARM goes into more intricate detail explaining the "why's", and sometimes the "how's" of an implementation. The ARM is _not_ the book to learn C++. The book by Lippman is an excellent introduction to C++, but it can't be everything to everyone. For many C++ programs, the book by Lippman is sufficient, but for more advanced programming the Reference Manual is required. It goes into detail that a tutorial can't. No other book was mentioned as an alternative to the ARM. I thought there might be more than one reference manual, for example for C we have books by Kernighan & Ritchie, and Harbison and Steele. Following are some of the points that were made. I've edited the responses significantly and tried to avoid duplication, so if you see 3 negative things and 3 positive things, that doesn't mean opinion was split 50/50. Opinion was definitely that owning the book by Lippman should not preclude purchasing "the ARM". I'll not identify the authors individually (you know who you are). "It [The ARM] is not at all tutorial, but a significant number of annotations are provided to explain what may not be obvious from the strict language description." "I used Lippman to learn C++ -- I now have the ARM and really never look at Lippman. Lippman is good for learning but does not have enough detail to be a good reference for serious programming." "Lippman has lots of examples where you can easily see which headers to include. Since the libraries aren't (it would seem) part of the standard, this is an area not covered at all in E&S" "Ellis & Stroustrup is as close as one will come to an "official" definition of the language." "On the other hand, the ARM alone is of little help, as a reference manual it lacks a 'thread`, it consists to 40% of cross references." "You really have to know C++ before you can use it [The ARM]." "It [The ARM] isn't *really* necessary other than for a final reference." "[The ARM] is sort of like "Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About C++, But were Afraid to Ask". "I have not found Lippman's book to be useful as a reference, and I have not found E&S to be useful as a tutorial. Each is excellent for its intended purpose, however." "[The ARM] is mainly good for answering the question: "Is this legal?" "both Lippman's C++ Primer and Stroustrup's C++ Programming Language (his OTHER book) are coming out in new editions next month. Sigh. But the ARM is not being revised real soon, as it already covers up to C++ 3.0." "However, I would recommend ARM only if you are not using g++. G++ does not strictly follow the language definition." "The book *Programming in C++* by Stephen C. Dewhurst and Kathy T. Stark is a good sequel to the Primer." "If for no other reason you'll need to when someone references it and a page number in comp.lang.c++." ""Depends on if you program right up to the limits of the language. (and of course, you will :-)" -- rick clark (rclark@concour.cs.concordia.ca) | Membre du "Bloke Quebecois" Concordia University, Montreal. |