View Full Version : Any opinions of other Qt book?

20th September 2006, 16:04

Does anyone have opinions of the book 'An Introduction to Design Patterns in C++ with Qt 4'? Amazon doesn't have any reviews yet.

I already have the Blanchette and Summerfiled book ... but was wondering if the other book might help me also. From the description it seems it would be an interesting read.

Any thoughts welcome.


21st September 2006, 03:03
Practial Qt is very good, please try.

21st September 2006, 16:03
I'm hoping to get a better understanding of the Qt architectural patterns. The book description seems to hint at this.

22nd September 2006, 15:51
Well, I'll answer my own question :o in case someone else is curious about the book.

There are many chapters that should have been left out IMHO. I found chapters 1-8 and 19-24 essentially useless (for me that is). C++ and patterns (the ones covered here at least) are covered in sufficient detail in other texts. Admittedly, the authors make their intent clear in the overview and in the posted TOC. So, at least for some, it's a one stop resource.

That being said ... I'm still glad that I purchased the book. Some sections of the other chapters go into detail that's not covered in 'C++ GUI Programming with Qt 4'. I especially appreciated chapter 15 ... as I've recently been dealing with meta-objects and properties and would have found it very useful.

I didn't care for the book referring to auto_ptr as a "smart pointer" ... misleading IMHO since it violates normal language semantics ... modifying the LHS in an expression. But, that's just a pet peeve of mine. I’d recommend QPointer or boost::smart_ptr instead. I’ll never understand why a real smart pointer wasn’t included with STL.

The book appears to be loaded with examples … downloadable from http://oop.mcs.suffolk.edu/dist. That I especially appreciate since I learn best by example. I've just recently purchased it; so, I have only looked at a few.

Just my thoughts … hope they’re helpful.

22nd September 2006, 22:49
... LHS in an expression ...

RHS ... that is :rolleyes: