The C++ FQA is quite the same stuff as the .pdf linked in this topic. So the same stuff about mostly not being practically relevant applies here. rgds, René
I really do recommend the C++ FAQ book. There is a lite version online: http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/ Since I've read both the lite online version and the book I strongly encourage you to obtain the book…
Most of the problems mentioned there don't apply to the regular C++ coder in his daily life, many of the mentioned problems are even non-existant if you stick to the encouraged coding styles of modern and real OOP C++.…
If you really try to make the OO as beautiful as humanly possible, you neither make the member variables public nor do you offer getters and setters. Everything is realized by functions which have a meaning, you really…
Or easier.. http://www.google.com/#q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fgoogle.com%2Fpr...
Same for Nvidia and Physx. Duh, AMD/ATI isn't really liked nowadays, is it?
The C++ FQA is quite the same stuff as the .pdf linked in this topic. So the same stuff about mostly not being practically relevant applies here. rgds, René
I really do recommend the C++ FAQ book. There is a lite version online: http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/ Since I've read both the lite online version and the book I strongly encourage you to obtain the book…
Most of the problems mentioned there don't apply to the regular C++ coder in his daily life, many of the mentioned problems are even non-existant if you stick to the encouraged coding styles of modern and real OOP C++.…
If you really try to make the OO as beautiful as humanly possible, you neither make the member variables public nor do you offer getters and setters. Everything is realized by functions which have a meaning, you really…
Or easier.. http://www.google.com/#q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fgoogle.com%2Fpr...
Same for Nvidia and Physx. Duh, AMD/ATI isn't really liked nowadays, is it?