C or C++?

[MarauderIIC]

Excellent article, sparda

[Falco Girgis]

I own the book too (I think it's the same edition). It was extremely helpful for me when I started with C++, but I did already have a background in procedural programming with C, so the lack of covering important C-ish concepts didn't really matter to me.

There is going to be no way in hell that you will learn in 21 days with that book either. Some of the days present a very large amount of material. It takes a few days to let it soak in (make some sample programs to screw around with is what I used to do when I didn't quite get a concept).

I stopped reading it after a certain point. You don't need to read an entire book on programming to write a program. I would return to it as a reference (it does make a very good reference, guys) for the very OO-whorish things that I only needed to use every so often.

I do agree with the emphasis you guys are putting on being familiar with C and good ol' procedural approaches. I think that it's important to understand where some of these things dish out performance hits and when resorting to a more procedural, C-style approach to a problem would be better. A complete C++ whore style might be great for Windows applications, but something like a game which has to perform things at 30 to 60 times a second really requires additional design decisions about performance. It's especially true when looking into console development.

[XianForce]

I own the book too (I think it's the same edition). It was extremely helpful for me when I started with C++, but I did already have a background in procedural programming with C, so the lack of covering important C-ish concepts didn't really matter to me.

There is going to be no way in hell that you will learn in 21 days with that book either. Some of the days present a very large amount of material. It takes a few days to let it soak in (make some sample programs to screw around with is what I used to do when I didn't quite get a concept).

I stopped reading it after a certain point. You don't need to read an entire book on programming to write a program. I would return to it as a reference (it does make a very good reference, guys) for the very OO-whorish things that I only needed to use every so often.

I do agree with the emphasis you guys are putting on being familiar with C and good ol' procedural approaches. I think that it's important to understand where some of these things dish out performance hits and when resorting to a more procedural, C-style approach to a problem would be better. A complete C++ whore style might be great for Windows applications, but something like a game which has to perform things at 30 to 60 times a second really requires additional design decisions about performance. It's especially true when looking into console development.

Yah I've done 2 lessons and I think it is some of the most well spent money I have ever spent. For mostly every term, it gives its dictionary definition, then gives a real life metaphor of it to simplify the term. For every section it has coding exercises during the lesson, and afterwards it has a summary(the summary sucks mostly), FAQ, and then a few questions and coding exercises for you to do to make sure you fully understand...And just by how far I am now, I can tell it's going to be a great reference.

[BOMBERMAN]

My vote is for C.