Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C++ > Compilation of Awkward Syntax

Reply
Thread Tools

Compilation of Awkward Syntax

 
 
Tobias Müller
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2013
Tony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
>>
>> On Apr 28, 5:55 am, Tony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>>>
>>>> I've almost finished teaching myself C++
>>>
>>> How long did it take you from start to finish?

>>
>> Three months. Why do you ask?

>
> Because becoming a master of C++ takes years and I'm wondering what the actual
> number is on average. You said you were "almost done" learning C++. (I missed
> the 'almost' when I posted, but the question is still valid).


At some point you have to stop learning (in the sense of guided learning,
reading books and solving toy exercises) and start gaining experience with
real programs.

Of course you will still have to consult a book every now and then. If you
have a mentor who can help you, even better.

But you won't become a master if you never start using the language.

Tobi
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tony
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)-
september.org>, (E-Mail Removed) says...
>
> Tony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> >>
> >> On Apr 28, 5:55 am, Tony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> >>> (E-Mail Removed) says...
> >>>
> >>>> I've almost finished teaching myself C++
> >>>
> >>> How long did it take you from start to finish?
> >>
> >> Three months. Why do you ask?

> >
> > Because becoming a master of C++ takes years and I'm wondering what the actual
> > number is on average. You said you were "almost done" learning C++. (I missed
> > the 'almost' when I posted, but the question is still valid).

>
> At some point you have to stop learning (in the sense of guided learning,
> reading books and solving toy exercises) and start gaining experience with
> real programs.
>
> Of course you will still have to consult a book every now and then. If you
> have a mentor who can help you, even better.
>
> But you won't become a master if you never start using the language.
>
> Tobi


I started in the early 1990's. As I tend to avoid some of the language (I subset
it), I probably wouldn't score well on a test of the more esoteric "features",
and certainly being employed as a C++ programmer (again) is definitely not
something I would entertain.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bo Persson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2013
Joe Snodgrass skrev 2013-05-01 23:54:
> On Apr 28, 5:55 am, Tony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>>
>>> I've almost finished teaching myself C++

>>
>> How long did it take you from start to finish?

>
> Three months. Why do you ask?
>


Twenty years, so far. I'll tell you when I'm done.


The fun part is that when asked the classic question

"On a scale from 1-10, where Bjarne Stroustrup is a 10, how well do you
know C++?",

the answer is often 9 after 3 months, 8 after a year, and 7 after 5
years. I'm now probably down to 5 or 6.

And I guess Bjarne isn't at 10 either.


Bo Persson

 
Reply With Quote
 
Stefan Ram
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2013
Bo Persson <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>"On a scale from 1-10, where Bjarne Stroustrup is a 10, how well do you
>know C++?",


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning...3Kruger_effect

 
Reply With Quote
 
James Kanze
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2013
On Thursday, 2 May 2013 04:41:43 UTC+1, Tony wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
> >
> > On Apr 28, 5:55*am, Tony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> > >
> > > > I've almost finished teaching myself C++
> > >
> > > How long did it take you from start to finish?

> >
> > Three months. Why do you ask?

>
> Because becoming a master of C++ takes years and I'm wondering
> what the actual number is on average. You said you were
> "almost done" learning C++. (I missed the 'almost' when
> I posted, but the question is still valid).


For what definition of master? What do you want to do with C++?
I'd say that with proper mentoring, an average person can learn
it sufficiently for most jobs in about six months. A gifted
person can learn it well enough to write a compiler for it in
about a year.

Of course, since it's not a dead language, you always have to
keep abreast. The C++ we write today isn't the C++ I learned 20
years ago.

--
James
 
Reply With Quote
 
88888 Dihedral
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-02-2013
Tony於 2013年5月2日星期四UTC+8上午11時41分43秒 寫道:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>
> >

>
> > On Apr 28, 5:55*am, Tony wrote:

>
> > > In article ,

>
> > > (E-Mail Removed) says...

>
> > >

>
> > > > I've almost finished teaching myself C++

>
> > >

>
> > > How long did it take you from start to finish?

>
> >

>
> > Three months. Why do you ask?

>
>
>
> Because becoming a master of C++ takes years and I'm wondering what the actual
>
> number is on average. You said you were "almost done" learning C++. (I missed
>
> the 'almost' when I posted, but the question is still valid).


In C++ the object part, the name space of using objects or
functions from some other library, and the template part
are all static linked in the compile time except those
objects use virtual methods inside a loop.

I'll assume that you are not using an interpreter embedded with
your C++ programs.

Also the vector part does boundary checking all the time
just like the old Fortran way but not the notorious
C-assembly way.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
>
> On Thursday, 2 May 2013 04:41:43 UTC+1, Tony wrote:
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> > >
> > > On Apr 28, 5:55*am, Tony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > > > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > > > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> > > >
> > > > > I've almost finished teaching myself C++
> > > >
> > > > How long did it take you from start to finish?
> > >
> > > Three months. Why do you ask?

> >
> > Because becoming a master of C++ takes years and I'm wondering
> > what the actual number is on average. You said you were
> > "almost done" learning C++. (I missed the 'almost' when
> > I posted, but the question is still valid).

>
> For what definition of master? What do you want to do with C++?
> I'd say that with proper mentoring, an average person can learn
> it sufficiently for most jobs in about six months.


By any definition of "master". What you wrote above seems to fit right in with
your "all the expressivity of C++" BS, in that, now you're trying to make it
seem like C++ is easy to master? Pfft. I'd say, that you cannot have a real C++
programmer with less than 5 years from the start of using it. Secondly, I
theorize that USE TIME is not as important as THINK TIME, especially in the
initial years. It's just that complex, intricate, subtle, etc. How do I know?
I've been there, done that. Blind-usage/trained-monkey-usage of it is to fall
prey to the spiel. You end up with a highly-proficient-C++-programmer, that
can't program himself out of a paper bag without millions of lines of esoteric
C++. Now, if that programmer was actually a good one, he would step out of the
fog of C++ and realize that a simple and elegant solution could be had save for
C++ not being able to render along those constraints.

So somewhere during journeyman path, the programmer on the "C++ master"
direction begins building all kinds of libraries (the preprocessor not
withstanding) until a light bulb moment arrives and that programmer realizes
that it's futile endeavor.

Of course the "programmer" in my text above is actually a frustrated (with C++)
SOFTWARE DEVELOPER. Big difference. A "programmer" is one of those who code
under the direction of "a C++ master", the "master" part here taking on a whole
new context. They buy into the spiel like young men enlisting in the army "for
real good reason".

Am I digressing again? Anyway, you get my drift.


> A gifted
> person can learn it well enough to write a compiler for it in
> about a year.


And what "gift" would that person possess, pray tell.

>
> Of course, since it's not a dead language, you always have to
> keep abreast. The C++ we write today isn't the C++ I learned 20
> years ago.


Nor is it the one I abandoned years ago, and it's not like building more
scaffolding has made it any better OVERALL than it was back then. An appropriate
metaphor may be that it has a lot of momentum, but two tons of moving garbage
has more momentum than one ton of it, so more is not better.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed) says...
>
> Joe Snodgrass skrev 2013-05-01 23:54:
> > On Apr 28, 5:55 am, Tony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> >> (E-Mail Removed) says...
> >>
> >>> I've almost finished teaching myself C++
> >>
> >> How long did it take you from start to finish?

> >
> > Three months. Why do you ask?
> >

>
> Twenty years, so far. I'll tell you when I'm done.
>
>
> The fun part is that when asked the classic question
>
> "On a scale from 1-10, where Bjarne Stroustrup is a 10, how well do you
> know C++?",
>
> the answer is often 9 after 3 months, 8 after a year, and 7 after 5
> years. I'm now probably down to 5 or 6.
>
> And I guess Bjarne isn't at 10 either.
>


I like that. (I know, everyone is saying, "duh, we know YOU would!"). I've been
down that road, reached 0 and wrapped around to 255 (at least no one can call me
a 2-bit (unsigned) int!).

Quiz for the day: What is an "int wit"?
 
Reply With Quote
 
James Kanze
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-03-2013
On Friday, 3 May 2013 05:04:38 UTC+1, Tony wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...


> Pfft. I'd say, that you cannot have a real C++
> programmer with less than 5 years from the start of using it.


Then you're wrong, because I regularly see competent programmers
learn it in about six months. Not well enough to write
a compiler for it, but well enough to be efficiently productive
in our application code.

--
James
 
Reply With Quote
 
Joe Snodgrass
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-04-2013
On May 1, 6:52*pm, (E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:
> JoeSnodgrass <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> >On Apr 28, 5:55*am, Tony <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> >>(E-Mail Removed) says...
> >>>I've almost finished teaching myself C++
> >> How long did it take you from start to finish?

> >Three months. *Why do you ask?

>
> * He might suspect that it might be a case of It took 90 % of
> * the time to learn to first 90 % and it will take 90 % of the
> * time to learn the next 9 %. (The other 90 % then will be
> * needed for the next 0.9 %.)
>
> * Can you explain:
>
> * * * - argument-dependent lookup
> * * * - SFINAE
> * * * - RAII
> * * * - RVO
> * * * - COW
> * * * - the rule of the three (today, also: five/zero)
> * * * - how to do exception-safe programming
> * * * - when should an operator be defined as a member?
> * * * - what is a scope guard?
> * * * - what is a good example of when to use a variadic
> * * * * template?
> * * * - What is the copy-and-swap idiom
> * * * - When to use "const", when "constexpr"?
> * * * - Does C++ have 2 dimensional arrays?
> * * * - When to use "auto" vs when to use a specific type?
> * * * - the difference between operator new and the new
> * * * * operator?
> * * * - the difference between member constants and constant
> * * * * members?
> * * * - how to implement the factorial using template
> * * * * metaprogramming
> * * * - type traits
> * * * - what algorithms are provided in the standard
> * * * * library (header <algorithm>)
> * * * - CRTP - Curiously Recurring Template Pattern
> * * * - What smart pointers are provided by the standard
> * * * * library, and when to use them?
> * * * - Functors
> * * * - policy-based design
> * * * - reinterpret_cast, dynamic_cast
> * * * - is the expression "a=2" an lvalue or an rvalue?
> * * * - move semantics
> * * * - perfect forwarding
> * * * - RTTI
> * * * - type erasure
> * * * - when to use "typename"
> * * * - What is C++'s most vexing parse?
> * * * - What is the difference between int a=2;,
> * * * * int a(2); and int a{2};?
>
> * And this is just what immediately popped into my head,
> * but there is still much more to learn!


Any time you feel like showing off your exemplary knowledge by posting
extensive lists like that one, you just go right ahead. You're doing
me a big fat juicy favor by itemizing the advanced topics I'm now
ready to study. Please make the list as exhaustive as you possibly
can, so I can begin ticking items off it, starting the moment you post
it. The harder you can make it, the better, because I LIVE FOR THE
CHALLENGE!!
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Most awkward quote perhaps? philo Computer Support 2 03-22-2008 04:15 AM
Awkward format string beginner Python 11 08-02-2007 02:55 PM
Hardware Motherboard Awkward Problem at Startup - VIA K7VM2 QUIROGACA Computer Support 2 11-14-2006 06:49 AM
A little awkward Anonyma Computer Support 9 06-27-2006 06:33 AM
The Kanye West show was Mike Myers SECOND awkward live tv moment heinzmenses@hotmail.com Digital Photography 31 09-12-2005 08:54 PM



Advertisments