Quote IMO doing C++ part-time (for lack of a better term) is very difficult. You cannot learn it from any book without spending months and years taming this beast.Then I would advise C# instead. Easier.And don't forget templates!!!! Exactly what I think! But, for a student like me, this is a "chicken & egg" problem: you don't get good at C++ without doing industrial level projects for several years and as a student you don't get such experience. So, my aim is just to show that I am willing to learn/improve myself. So, I want to mention these books on one hand, however on the other hand, I don't want them take too much attention to turn my interviews into C++ interviews: at the end of the day, my knowledge/experience is basic. What should I do? just say "basic C++" or mention these books and/or relevant code (e.g. simple MC, FDM, Trees etc..) as well.QuoteOk, being enthusiastic about C++ is good, but you must mean it. When I meet people I know within 10 minutes if they like C++ BTW, did you run the code in my book? Reading is not enough. BBTW I have 2 books-> intro(2006) and advanced (2004)I have the 2004 version of your books. Very nice book. mostly about FDM. the first 18 chapters or so took some patience, but everything came together very nicely around Chp 20. I ran your code, and even implemented some of your classes in my own code. I also coded all the exercises in MJ's Design Patterns book.Btw, to your point: I truly like C++. It's the only language that really requires a clever mind for a nice code/structure that I know of. However, I am also aware that I don't have enough experience.

well if you really know my book and Daniel's book, why not write on your cv that that's what you know.

Saying you've read Duffy,Joshi,Sutter is a mildly objective way of conveying a level of C++ skill.But as I say elsewhere, you must back this up by being able to do any questions in those books.

QuoteDCFC: Saying you've read Duffy,Joshi,Sutter is a mildly objective way of conveying a level of C++ skill.That's presuming the interviewer/HR has heard of these books. The probability of HR having a clue is infinitesimal; and I had an interview recently where the guy had heard of neither Duffy nor Joshi. I had conveyed NOTHING about the shitloads of work I've done improving my C++ this year by just listing the book titles and authors.So now on my CV I also list the main skills I've learned/most relevant problems solved.Note also that interviewers also "push the envelope" by confronting you with a problem you've never seen before/had no experience whatsoever of before. Just to see how you react/attack the problem/think on your feet under pressure. In fact, I was led to believe that this was the main idea of interviews. Therefore the more you tell them in the CV the better they're able to say, "OK, let's take it that one step further" into the unknown. So it's a tradeoff between telling them enough to get your foot in the door but not telling them too much so that they can hammer you with something obscure.

QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCSaying you've read Duffy,Joshi,Sutter is a mildly objective way of conveying a level of C++ skill.But as I say elsewhere, you must back this up by being able to do any questions in those books.The problem is I don't think interviewers will ask specifically from these books. As ctw26 puts it, I am afraid they will see C++ and just say QuoteOriginally posted by: ctw26" i see you have put c++ as your weapon of choice. very well, I will ask you some questions on it."and start hammering with syntax type problems etc.. my OOP experience is also limited with C++ Premier Plus, MJ's, and Duffy's books. I am actually planning to carry a copy of my code on a CD with me, in case I get hammered/embarrassed, so that at least they know I am not lying, lol QuoteNote also that interviewers also "push the envelope" by confronting you with a problem you've never seen before/had no experience whatsoever of before...Therefore the more you tell them in the CV the better they're able to say, "OK, let's take it that one step further" into the unknown. So it's a tradeoff between telling them enough to get your foot in the door but not telling them too much so that they can hammer you with something obscure.Yes, this is the tradeoff I am trying to get a grip of. Maybe I should just say "basic C++".DCFC, can I send two versions of my resume and ask your opinion about it? You get to keep whichever you like

QuoteOriginally posted by: mji agree that basic C++ is sensible. Reading my book is, of course, even more sensibleMJ great book by the way, probably the best I've seen. Your "Concepts" book is also at the top of my to-read-list.

QuoteOriginally posted by: INFIDELQuoteDCFC: Saying you've read Duffy,Joshi,Sutter is a mildly objective way of conveying a level of C++ skill.That's presuming the interviewer/HR has heard of these books. The probability of HR having a clue is infinitesimal; and I had an interview recently where the guy had heard of neither Duffy nor Joshi. I had conveyed NOTHING about the shitloads of work I've done improving my C++ this year by just listing the book titles and authors..well HR won't know anything about C++ either. If an interviewer hasn't heard of Duffy,Joshi,Sutter, I would be seriously worried about what planet he is on. In any case, say you have read and know 3 books is conveying info whether the interviewer knows them or not. You can always turn the interview round a little and tell the interviewer what you learnt from them.

QuoteIf an interviewer hasn't heard of Duffy,Joshi,Sutter, I would be seriously worried about what planet he is on. Scandalous We should have a chat with this chap.Yes, I agree completely Maybe they use other books.