What are your favourite C++ books?

[ralph_pt]

pragsoft.com free book on the website is the one i use from time to time

[hansenmartin]

Schildt's C++ The complete reference
Meyers' Effective C++
Meyers' More Effective C++
Blanchette's & Summerfield's C++ GUI Programming with Qt 3

[ahad0001]

C++ Programming Language by Bjarne Stroustrup.

[kaufenpreis]

My favorite book for introducing an experienced programmer to C++ is Nigel Chapman's "The Late Night Guide to C++". This would probably not be a good book for someone with no programming experience at all. But if you already understand the idea of writing a program to tell a computer to perform a task, and you understand in general how the computer carries out the instructions expressed in the program, and in particular if you have successfully written a few programs in some other language, then Chapman's book can help you understand what is special about C++, and why the language is so powerful. The book is lively and witty, and has some unusual examples drawn from niche programming languages (Metafont and AWK). I appreciated this because it showed that by defining a few appropriate classes and operations, you could use C++, a mainstream, general-purpose language, to accomplish the same tasks for which people used to resort to special-purpose languages or applications.

The book isn't cheap, and it is definitely a tutorial, not a reference. By that I mean that you may read it once or twice through, but after that, if you continue as a C++ programmer, you will probably not go back to Chapman's book again and again -- you will want something else (like Stroustrup's "The C++ Programming Language", or Meyers's "Effective" books, or books by Sutter or Alexandrescu or Josuttis) as regular references. So it makes sense to borrow it from a library if you can, or if you're a student, maybe chip in with others to buy a copy you can share, or buy it used if you can find it.

But even if you have to buy it outright (as I did), I would say it's worth it. It is a well-thought-out, well-paced introduction that concentrates on the class and object mechanisms that make C++ different from C and from Java. (In particular I remember it having a really good treatment of multiple inheritance.)

On another note, I should also mention that Stanley Lippman has written two very good books: "The C++ Primer" (now in its 4th edition, I believe), and "Essential C++". The "Primer" is intended as a thorough introduction to the language, and I do mean thorough -- it's about 1200 pages long. Unlike Chapman's book, it can serve as a useful reference even after you know the language, but its sheer size and comprehensiveness may make it daunting. "Essential C++" takes a tutorial approach, and has some good examples and exercises, but is less useful as a long-term reference than the "Primer" and less fun to read than Chapman's "Late-Night Guide". At this point, personal taste (and budget) start to affect your choice, so I'll leave you with these suggestions, and recommend that you go to a bookstore and look at the books and buy the one that appeals to you most, since that's the one you're most likely to actually read and profit from.

[tech4tall]

The Qt3 book already mentioned is a MUST HAVE (I even PAID for it!) (They even had it at Barnes and Noble!)
of course when I got it Qt4.1 rc 1 was already out (and I wasn't going to start using an old version!) so I pretty much used it to just get an idea about HOW to use Qt to build Android apps since some of the syntax is a little different.

C++ In Plain English is a great reference book, especially for people moving from 'plain old' C to C++. (Which I did kicking and screaming, BTW and now would never go back) It touches on many topics but puts a lot of focus on object orientation and skims over things like int,long,float,printf,arrays,etc (eg. things you should already know unless you are completely new to this)

Not a C++ book, but the O'Reilly Pocket Reference on Regular Expressions is quite helpful even though it is REALLY meant for Java, C#, and PHP

Katrina

The Art of Building Qt Applications: Cross-platform development is a kind of holy grail, and Trolltech's Qt toolkit may well be the most promising solution yet to this development challenge. Qt is widely used for the development of GUI applications as well as console tools and servers, and it's especially appealing to programmers who need to write cross-platform applications to run on Linux/Unix, Mac, and Windows machines without having to rewrite for each platform. The Book of Qt 4 offers an in-depth explanation of Qt 4 that goes beyond the common focus on C++ programming.

[Roseangel41]

Actually i am new and learning so thats why i dint haven idea which book is favoirt..

[slaphead]

My favorite is Programming: Principles and Practice Using C++ (Bjarne Stroustrup), this is the very first C++ book i've read.

[slaphead]

Hi! I used this list when I bought C++ book. I bought the "The C++ Programming Language".

[aptronpankaj]

Join Best C & C++ training Institute they will you beter

[sembul]

Hi there can you advise me good books to learn Qt or course? Thank you!

[iGoo]

I couldn't get through that book. Maybe it's because of poor Polish translation (it shows, that there was no linguistic editor), but I find it's language too convoluted to be easly understood.

Damian

I am Chinese,and we have Chinese Edition of that book when in college.
But,I preferred the original.

think in C++(2 volumes) is also good C++ books,I think.

[rajesh]

is the Design Patterns ,Gamma, Erich e-book available?

[tetsuoii]

haha, I bought Stroustrup's book in polish too, and yes it was terrible to read(I'm not a native speaker) convoluted is the word.

[FelixB]

can anybody recommend a good book about applying design pattern? like a collection of case studies? I am familiar with several patterns (I hope), but I don't know when to apply which pattern.

thanks

[yop]

Schildt's C++ The complete reference
Meyers' Effective C++
Meyers' More Effective C++
Blanchette's & Summerfield's C++ GUI Programming with Qt 3

and qt assistant plus http://www.cppreference.com/

[katrina]

I am sure a lot of people don't agree with this next statement, but:

I would recomend to a new programmer to learn Java first, then C++. The high level of object oriented-ness is a good practice in C++ and it lets you learn HOW to program and how to think like a programmer without worrying about memory management (although Qt takes a ton of load off this!) and some of C++'s other "advanced" features. (plus the syntax a VERY similar)

I don't, however, know any good Java books... I learned Java b/c it is similar to other modern OO languages and I just read though the Javadoc's :-) and started coding away :-)

Katrina

[wysota]

I don't, however, know any good Java books...

"Thinking in Java"

Learning Java first can make people hate programming because Java is soooo fast

[katrina]

"Thinking in Java"

Learning Java first can make people hate programming because Java is soooo fast

LOL Yeah Java has to be one of the slowest frigin languages in the world... luckily most people nowadays are buying 300000GHz computers with 847583408MB RAM to check their email, use AIM, surf MySpace, and download illegal music so they can afford to use programs written in a language that should have taken their mascot from Logo. (until they get a couple virii and spywares 'cause that will eat up 299999.99GHz of their 300000GHz (Long live Linux))

Gotta give Java one thing though... it is WAY portable... I mean c'mon even the Blackberry runs Java! (actually the entire Blackberry OS is written in Java!)

(Hmmm I seem to have gotten off topic here... back to C++ books
ummm... I already listed all of the C++ books I have... LOL I guess I will stop now :-)

Katrina

[wysota]

Gotta give Java one thing though... it is WAY portable... I mean c'mon even the Blackberry runs Java! (actually the entire Blackberry OS is written in Java!)

Well, yes, if you don't count situations, when your program written in java version 1.x.y.z runs, but refuses to run on 1.x.y.z+1. Or runs on SUN implementation and refuses to run on MS "implementation" (or orther).

[GreyGeek]

I am sure a lot of people don't agree with this next statement, but:

I would recomend to a new programmer to learn Java first, then C++.
...snip...

Katrina

I've had formal Java training. I hate Java, and not because it is too slooooowww, even with JIT.

While doing research into alternative development tools and platforms for my department, I tried Eclipse and JDeveloper using Java against our Oracle backend to create our "Homestead" application. JDeveloper was (is?) better than Eclipse, but dealing with Enterprise Beans and the like was a royal PITA. Almost without fail, when I wanted to add special functionality and drilled down into the methods, I'd encounter the base method which had a warning that it was generated automatically and any changes would be lost. So sad, because then I'd have to subclass the generator to add the functionality I wanted. My second big complaint was that once I got the app built it was too slow to be useful.

So, I tried creating the Homestead app with Boa_Constructor and Python, also against Oracle. I really LOVED that tool combo. It was 5-10 times easier to develop in it than in JDeveloper, AND it was 10 times faster than the Java app. The second BIG PLUS was that all files were ASCII, including the screens, making version control of the screens easy. But, alas, the fly in the ointment was that Boa_Constructor is an aggregate tool and when updating it almost invariably wxWindows, or Python, or some library was the wrong version. Boa has some warts, like all tools, but the development cycle on Boa was/is too slow to commit to it. When they can combine all the components into a single tool that results in better version control then Boa will be a tool to revisit.

My next test was with RealBasic, a proprietary tool that runs on both Windows and Linux. I tried it primarily because I used to program in VB and it is a good GUI RAD tool, if you connect to a fast backend. The RealBasic test ended RealQuick because it failed the tutorial test - if you can't get the tool to work following the tutorial then folks aren't tending to business. For a proprietary tool that is a fatal mistake.

My last test was with QT3.3 using the demo version for Windows. Using the bootk "C++ GUI Programming with Qt 3", learning QT 3.3 was easy, with the fine help of people who visit this forum. Even while learning the ins&outs of the QT3.x Designer, the development of the Homestead app was very quick, again thanks to the help of the folks on this forum. I was able to create the Homestead test app in about 5 to 6 weeks, while learning C++ at the same time. My boss was reluctant to consider QT for our department because he prefered Java and he heard "horror" stories about how hard C++ is too learn. He also had misunderstandings about garbage collection (memory leaks) in C++. After my boss saw my demo app, learned that QT controls garbage collection, and visited the QT website to view their demo video, he approved the use of QT in our department. It will become the primary tool in our move toward platform independence.

Just about that time QT4 came out. It's development paradigm was totally different, more along the classic lines of C++ development, as I understand it. While I missed the old Designer at first, it didn't take me long to realize the superiority of the classic method, and its main feature -- total developer control. One no longer has to work around a Designer tool. (And Trolltech can divert resources from maintaining and improving what is essentiall a GUI RAD devl tool to their core product, the API.) I decided to redo Homestead from scratch. It took about two weeks, primarily gettting used to the new API and replacing QT3 stuff with QT4 stuff.

Oh, speed? While a certain report created using our original Visual FoxPro 6.0 app took 2 1/2 HOURS to generate, the same report with the QT4 app takes only 2 MINUTES 30 SECONDS!! While testing the JDeveloper solution I canceled the report request because I got tired of waiting.

So, Java isn't in my future. In fact, were I asked to drop QT and do all my work in Java I'd reconsider my pledge to work till I am 70 years old.