1

Topic: C ++ after C#

Pair of questions about a C ++ after C# (10 + years): 1. It would be desirable any estimation, what is the time can occupy  to write the normal code? That is not worse, than C#; the same data domain. 2. Whether will write on a C ++ torture if an interior I gravitate on the contrary to DSL? Or it is not so mandatory on the contrary? The book advise, please.

2

Re: C ++ after C#

AC> Pair of questions about a C ++ after C# (10 + years): AC> 1. It would be desirable any estimation, what is the time can occupy  to write the normal code? That is not worse, than C#; the same data domain. AC> 2. Whether will write on a C ++ torture if an interior I gravitate on the contrary to DSL? Or it is not so mandatory on the contrary? AC> the Book advise, please. The first problem normally happens to pointers and a dynamic storage. In With ++ storage the programmer controls. The second problem - absence of a high-grade reflection. The library strongly differs. Templates too cause questions. For sculpturing GUI the indirect library is required, is normal Qt. Well, and IDE. If in studio you will model, some "buns" C# for With ++ are not present. The book, probably - Straustrup "Three geese". This second issuing, there already With ++ 11. He wrote it for students, instead of for .

3

Re: C ++ after C#

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: AC> the Book advise, please. Scott Mejers "a C Effective utilization ++. 55 true councils" the Concentrate of subtleties of programming. The part from them concerns immediately C singularities ++. Very much it is recommended to everything, not only passing from C# to With ++

4

Re: C ++ after C#

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: AC> Pair of questions about a C ++ after C# (10 + years): AC> 1. It would be desirable any estimation, what is the time can occupy  to write the normal code? That is not worse, than C#; the same data domain. Something working to write not for long, but the normal code... Probably, in half a year, in a year if you will write and read it is a lot of. AC> 2. Whether will write on a C ++ torture if an interior I gravitate on the contrary to DSL? Or it is not so mandatory on the contrary? Depends on the person. Probably, you even will receive a certain pleasure from language with RAII and . AC> the Book advise, please. A C ++ Primer  The With ++ Standard Library (second ed.) Dzhosattisa of a C ++ Templates The Complete Guide (second ed.)  and Dzhosattisa. Effective a C ++ to Mejersa (presentation in the form of councils, he wrote some such books to read 55,35,42 variants) All aforesaid to read mandatory. It is in addition possible to take the Talmud of Straustrupa (the language creator), but personally for me its presentation looks rather difficultly read.

5

Re: C ++ after C#

SO _> a C ++ Primer  Yes, a good choice. Still it is possible Stephen Prata's textbook - the last issuing. There too With ++ 11. SO _> The With ++ Standard Library (second ed.) Dzhosattisa is mandatory for pro SO _> a C ++ Templates The Complete Guide (second ed.)  and Dzhosattisa. Mandatory for the pro. I will recommend to begin with the first issuing - a file in a network dangles. SO _> Effective a C ++ Mejersa (presentation in the form of councils, he wrote some such books to read 55,35,42 variants) mandatory for the pro. In such order: at first 55, then 35, and then 42 is already on With ++ 11 and With ++ to 14 standards SO _> All aforesaid to read mandatory. SO _> it is in addition possible to take the Talmud of Straustrupa (the language creator), but personally for me its presentation looks rather SO _> difficultly read. Yes, for a forehead which already wrote on With ++ it it is too chewed. But there there are examples of creation GUI with usage FLTK in Studio 2010.  - simple , in studio registers in a half-kick.

6

Re: C ++ after C#

AC> Pair of questions about a C ++ after C# (10 + years): I apologize that , and what motivation of passage?

7

Re: C ++ after C#

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: AC> 1. It would be desirable any estimation, what is the time can occupy  to write the normal code? That is not worse, than C#; the same data domain. Very much individually. Well, half a year-year - probably, at least. AC> 2. Whether will write on a C ++ torture if an interior I gravitate on the contrary to DSL? Or it is not so mandatory on the contrary? I can tell nothing. AC> the book advise, please. I do not know good books on With ++ not for beginners... Ekker Can?

8

Re: C ++ after C#

Hello, koenig, you wrote: AC>> Pair of questions about a C ++ after C# (10 + years): K> I apologize that , and what motivation of passage? I apologize, what , unless it is not obvious?

9

Re: C ++ after C#

AC>>> Pair of questions about a C ++ after C# (10 + years): K>> I apologize that , and what motivation of passage? MZ> I Apologize, what , unless it is not obvious? There is no I for a long time  in the opposite direction

10

Re: C ++ after C#

AC>> Pair of questions about a C ++ after C# (10 + years): K> I apologize that , and what motivation of passage? This personal, is not connected to a labor market almost.

11

Re: C ++ after C#

K>> I apologize that , and what motivation of passage? MZ> I Apologize, what , unless it is not obvious? I apologize, what I am interested, but it is really curious, what "obvious" motives can be?

12

Re: C ++ after C#

Hello, AtCrossroads, you wrote: One more book, more on design, than on language, however, rather is useful: Modern a C ++ Design: Generic Programming and Design Patterns Applied Aleksandresku of books can be extorted Some from git clone https://github.com/bjut-hz/E-Books, lie in the directory "program language"