View Full Version : Outdated programming book?

January 28th, 2012, 02:55 PM
I was not sure where to post this so I put it in programming talk. I have been wanting to learn C++ for a while now. I purchased a book a long time ago, at the least it was over 5 years ago. The book is SAMS Teach Yourself C++ in 24 hours Second Edition. Well long story short I ended up getting more into HTML/CSS and this book ended up collecting dust.

Recently I have renewed interest in learning C++. My question is: will this book be too outdated to serve as a starting point into learning C++? Or should I buy a new book. I am hoping I can still use this book as I am on a budget but if I had to I would be willing to purchase something more current.

Thank you for reading. :)

January 28th, 2012, 03:56 PM
Read it again, my guess is that a refresher course in fundamentals can never be a bad thing.

January 28th, 2012, 04:38 PM
Outdated? Likely not much of an issue. But beware of the "24 hours" mindset, stay humble, and know that you won't learn all the C++ you need to know from such a book (http://norvig.com/21-days.html).

Edit: To clarify, I'm not saying you shouldn't use the book -- the reviews seem to be decent. I'm just offering some advice to keep in mind while using it.

January 28th, 2012, 05:01 PM
C++ standard is not refreshed that often, so 10 year old book is still ok. There is brand new standard coming out (C++11) but it expands on previous editions so it's not like existing books become worthless. Also migration to this new standard won't happen over night and 'old' C++ still has a lot of value.

January 28th, 2012, 05:09 PM
The 24 hours books are a good introduction - as long as you approach it as 24 x 1 hour lessons, not something that happens in a day. Expect to take three weeks to digest a book like that.

January 29th, 2012, 01:02 PM
Awesome. Glad to hear I can still use this book as a starting point. Thanks for your responses and if you guys maybe have a personal favorite book that helped you learn C++ let me know.

Thanks again,