|
I need to learn about STL and Boost. Any suggestions for books, tutorials whatever?
Many thanks.
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
STL[^]
Boost[^]
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
Fortunately not! 
Just trying to save a bit of searching time.
|
|
|
|
|
Check the CP articles, for instance:
An Introductory STL tutorial[^]
An Introduction to Boost[^]
For more, you may search on the article page[^], or ask in the Q&A section[^]
What are you actually doing with such a technology ? This is so old that even I used to use it !
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the links, I will check them out.
Don't know yet what it's for, it's somebody else's choice.
|
|
|
|
|
this [^] is pretty nice for the STL. Something about the way it's organized really hit my head right.
No idea about boost though; that became ubiquitous after I switched to perl for most day to day work.
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Meyers is an excellent writer:
Effctive STL
[^]
But if you really want cutting edge you should learn more of C++11/14. Some of the Boost stuff is sooner or later becomming obsolete... For example lambdas are in Boost but they are a part of the new language standard. Giving you much niftier syntax. Get a nice overview from Wkipedia on C++11. And read more on the blogs of Scott Meyers and Herb Sutter.
Good Luck!
Life is too shor
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to the club!
megaadam wrote: Scott Meyers is an excellent writer:
Effctive STL
[^]
I concur.
Also as a summary of the book, std::vector and std::string will be the container you want for 90% of your tasks. Learn those and your well on your way. Then learn what's in <algorithms>
You will also need to learn about std::shared_ptr and std::weak_ptr which are not in this book. But there are plenty of places on the web to learn about it.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Standard-Library-Tutorial-Reference/dp/0201379260[^]
This is a good in depth reference book, but it was written in 1999.
|
|
|
|
|
"STL" is just the C++ Standard Library. Any recent book on C++ should cover it in depth but the ultimate book on the topic is The C++ Standard Library - A Tutorial and Reference[^] by Nicolai M. Josuttis. Look for the first edition of the book if you want only C++ 98 Standard - otherwise get the second edition.
As for Boost, just look at their web site: Boost Documentation[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Reading this article: "Smartphone owners’ appetite for new apps wanes" By Daniel Thomas in London and Tim Bradshaw in San Francisco, August 17, 2014 6:25 pm : [^] ...
I thought there were some prime hypotheticals missing, like:
1. most device/OS mobile app stores applications are crap: trivial, silly, useless ... even scams ? cf. "The Windows Store is a Cesspool of Scams — Why Doesn’t Microsoft Care?" Howtogeek.com's recent assault on the Windows App Store: [^].
2. there is a limit in what apps for small form-factor devices can usefully provide their users ? ... a limit related to the simple physicality mismatch of user and device ?
Of course, an obvious hypothetical is that Financial Times technology coverage is crap.
“I have diligently numbered the days of pure and genuine happiness which have fallen to my lot: They amount to 14.” Abd-Ar Rahman III, Caliph of Cordoba, circa 950CE.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been convinced for quite some time now that most people don't need a cell phone much less a smart phone.
This is one ship that I'll be happy to see go down to the very bottom - hopefully it will take a load of jargon spewing techno-snobs down to good 'ole Davy Jones as well. The smart phone market has ballooned out of control, I'll be glad to see it take some solid hits.
Hopefully this signals the beginning of the end of one of the most bloated fads in technology I've ever seen.
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote: I've been convinced for quite some time now that most people don't need a cell phone much less a smart phone
Most people don't need a car, either.
Care to elaborate on why I don't need something that allows me to make a phone call, or text a friend, or lookup stuff while I'm out (eg shopping comparisons, heated debate closers, addresses we seem to have just lost). Also not sure why I have no need of a GPS since I'm geographically challenged. It's true - I'm useless with directions. Or music? There's no need for me to have music on the go? Movies I can watch while travelling? Books to read during downtime?
Or the fact that my morning ritual is reading the news in bed - far easier than actually getting out of bed to get the paper that's been thrown into a wasps' nest during a thunderstorm.
The calendar that I live and breath by, the weather reports that can, almost literally, save my life when I'm out cycling, my Strava app to record my rides, my authenticator that saves me carrying multiple 2FA keyfobs, my WordLens app to enable me to read signs and menus while in other countries, take photos of the places I go, the people I meet, and of course Google Docs / iCloud / OneDrive apps so when I get that "Argh - I need help!" call from someone in the office I can review and edit the documents directly.
Then again maybe I'm not "most people".
My phone is with me at all times but only used when I need it. I don't walk down streets texting. I don't sit in restaurants tweeting with the person across the table. I don't actually spend much time on the actual phone.
My smartphone isn't critical to getting work and stuff done. It is critical to getting it done efficiently enough that I can actually get all of it done, and as a bonus it makes my travelling life far, far richer.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Amen.
As usual, written better than I would have, too!
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Most people don't need a car, either.
If we agree then there isn't much reason to elaborate.
That said, until I successfully take over the world you've no need to justify your ownership of a phone to me.
|
|
|
|
|
OK, but I'm not sure how this will work one I successfully take over the world.
Time share?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
How about I control the entire world but make you the Internet Czar?
I mean, you wouldn't take over the world for non-internet related things would you?
|
|
|
|
|
If you can give me control of all road users and roads in general then we have a deal.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: If you can give me control of all road users and roads in general then we have a deal.
As long as I'm immune to whatever goofy things you decide to enact you've got yourself a deal.
After I'm world ruler I probably won't be leaving my private island much anyways...
|
|
|
|
|
That link to the Windows App Store Cesspool is really great. Can't believe M$ is allowing that to go on.
Very informative. Thx.
|
|
|
|
|
newton.saber wrote: Can't believe M$ is allowing that to go on.
Why not?  I can!
Here is how I see it went.
MS had an image problem: the Windows Store cupboard was bare, compared to the Apple and Google offerings. So when Window Phone was released, they assumed (possibly rightly) that without lots of apps to choose from, people wouldn't buy the phone - regardless of whether or not they would load the app or run it anyway!
So rather than help developers to produce good apps quickly (remember MS thinks developers are a "necessary evil" at best, and "pond scum" at worst) they decided not to moderate the store at all. After all, they get a cut of every paid-for app anyway, even if it is malware! Quicker, easier, more cost efficient - and that's MS all the way these days: cash is king and to heck with users!
I could be wrong: I could just be a cynical old fart. But...
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: I could be wrong: I could just be a cynical old fart. But...
Quite a valid point. Nothing Cynical about it! They need an app store full to compete with Apple & Google, a store that is full sells more phones...
|
|
|
|
|
I think you are right on target with that analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: So rather than help developers to produce good apps quickly (remember MS thinks developers are a "necessary evil" at best, and "pond scum" at worst) they decided not to moderate the store at all.
But, but, but... it wasn't too long ago Apple was EVIL because they moderated their app store. My how things have changed. 
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
I never said that!
Mind you, I don't use Apple products... 
You looking for sympathy?
You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric
(Page 1788, if it helps)
|
|
|
|
|
I've said this before but Microsoft's tablet venture would have been much more successful without a 'Store'...they should have done what they always have in the past and given developers as much freedom as possible...by trying to imitate Apple and Google, they doomed themselves.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
