Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #23960 > unrolled thread

Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

Contents

  Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? gdotone@gmail.com - 2012-07-30 08:09 -0700
    Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? TheGunslinger <mikiesrunsbaal.sec@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-08-01 10:30 -0500
      Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-01 10:38 -0700
        Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? TheGunslinger <mikiesrunsbaal.sec@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-08-01 19:42 -0500
          Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-01 18:04 -0700
            Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? TheGunslinger <mikiesrunsbaal.sec@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-08-01 20:35 -0500
          Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? William Ahern <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2012-08-02 13:50 -0700
    Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? gdotone@gmail.com - 2012-08-02 12:22 -0700
      Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-08-02 21:37 +0200
        Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-08-02 15:44 -0400
      Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? TheGunslinger <mikiesrunsbaal.sec@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-08-04 08:10 -0500
        Re: Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-08-04 16:37 -0700

#23960 — Has anyone used "Data Structures and Program Design in C"?

ISBN 0-13-725649-3 
copyright 1991  old book ...

I'm working though the book and would like to discuss some of the examples with someone from time to time. Yes, I could include the authors complete programs for discussion from everyone, but that's a lot of code in some cases.

Thanks everyone.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#24062

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:09:16 -0700 (PDT), gdotone@gmail.com wrote:

>ISBN 0-13-725649-3 
>copyright 1991  old book ...
>
>I'm working though the book and would like to discuss some of the examples with someone from time to time. Yes, I could include the authors complete programs for discussion from everyone, but that's a lot of code in some cases.
>
>Thanks everyone.


I may have a copy packed away in my library, but I am in the process
of moving and it is unavailable.

However, I would suggest that you might want to update your text to an
edition that includes the 2011 ANSI/ISO updates.

I am finding many legacy features are being deprecated and only
maintained to support legacy software.

If you are trying to update your skills, this might be a better
approach.

I know that Sams has a good tutorial series in their Sams Learn C and
other languages.

I have an edition from 2010 before the standards were officially
updated, and it is a good read and a good walk through the C-language.

I haven't checked, but there might be a newer edition that fully
incorporates the 2011 -> C11 standards.

Some other readers of this forum may have other suggestions for
updated tutorials should they choose to respond?

Good luck,

MJR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24075

TheGunslinger <mikiesrunsbaal.sec@sbcglobal.net> writes:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:09:16 -0700 (PDT), gdotone@gmail.com wrote:
>>ISBN 0-13-725649-3 
>>copyright 1991  old book ...
>>
>>I'm working though the book and would like to discuss some of the
>>examples with someone from time to time. Yes, I could include the
>>authors complete programs for discussion from everyone, but that's a
>>lot of code in some cases.
>
> I may have a copy packed away in my library, but I am in the process
> of moving and it is unavailable.
>
> However, I would suggest that you might want to update your text to an
> edition that includes the 2011 ANSI/ISO updates.
[snip]

I'm not sure that there are any books out yet that cover the 2011 ISO C
standard (unless you count the standard itself, of course).

A book that covers the 1999 standard would likely be better than a book
from 1991.

Note that not all compilers even support the 1999 standard; Microsoft in
particular has expressed a lack of interest in supporting any standard
past the 1990 one.  (Ignore anyone who claims that this statement
indicates any dislike for C99; it's just something to be aware of.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    Will write code for food.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24105

On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 10:38:18 -0700, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
wrote:

>TheGunslinger <mikiesrunsbaal.sec@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:09:16 -0700 (PDT), gdotone@gmail.com wrote:
>>>ISBN 0-13-725649-3 
>>>copyright 1991  old book ...
>>>
>>>I'm working though the book and would like to discuss some of the
>>>examples with someone from time to time. Yes, I could include the
>>>authors complete programs for discussion from everyone, but that's a
>>>lot of code in some cases.
>>
>> I may have a copy packed away in my library, but I am in the process
>> of moving and it is unavailable.
>>
>> However, I would suggest that you might want to update your text to an
>> edition that includes the 2011 ANSI/ISO updates.
>[snip]
>
>I'm not sure that there are any books out yet that cover the 2011 ISO C
>standard (unless you count the standard itself, of course).
>
>A book that covers the 1999 standard would likely be better than a book
>from 1991.
>
>Note that not all compilers even support the 1999 standard; Microsoft in
>particular has expressed a lack of interest in supporting any standard
>past the 1990 one.  (Ignore anyone who claims that this statement
>indicates any dislike for C99; it's just something to be aware of.)

Good point about C99. But I believe there was a C standard update in
2003?

I am currently reviewing C++ myself, and most of the books published
recently indicate that they actually incorporate the new standard
C++11 because it has been out for so long as C++oX (I think). And I
purchased a new text a few months back that specifically states it is
updated for the new features according to the 2011 standard.

I pretty much expect that to be true for C though I could be totally
wrong, but a little research should uncover the most recent versions
of C-texts and what they cover.

Hope this helps in your decision to do w/e.

Respectfully,

MJR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24106

TheGunslinger <mikiesrunsbaal.sec@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> wrote:
[...]
>>I'm not sure that there are any books out yet that cover the 2011 ISO C
>>standard (unless you count the standard itself, of course).
>>
>>A book that covers the 1999 standard would likely be better than a book
>>from 1991.
>>
>>Note that not all compilers even support the 1999 standard; Microsoft in
>>particular has expressed a lack of interest in supporting any standard
>>past the 1990 one.  (Ignore anyone who claims that this statement
>>indicates any dislike for C99; it's just something to be aware of.)
>
> Good point about C99. But I believe there was a C standard update in
> 2003?

No.  ISO C standards were issued in 1990, 1999, and 2011.  An amendment
was issued in 1995.  (The 1990 ISO standard was based on the 1989 ANSI
standard; after that, all standards were issued directly by ISO.)

(There was a 2003 standard in C++; if you want to discuss that, try
comp.std.c++.)

[...]

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    Will write code for food.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24107

On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 18:04:14 -0700, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
wrote:

>TheGunslinger <mikiesrunsbaal.sec@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
>> wrote:
>[...]
>>>I'm not sure that there are any books out yet that cover the 2011 ISO C
>>>standard (unless you count the standard itself, of course).
>>>
>>>A book that covers the 1999 standard would likely be better than a book
>>>from 1991.
>>>
>>>Note that not all compilers even support the 1999 standard; Microsoft in
>>>particular has expressed a lack of interest in supporting any standard
>>>past the 1990 one.  (Ignore anyone who claims that this statement
>>>indicates any dislike for C99; it's just something to be aware of.)
>>
>> Good point about C99. But I believe there was a C standard update in
>> 2003?
>
>No.  ISO C standards were issued in 1990, 1999, and 2011.  An amendment
>was issued in 1995.  (The 1990 ISO standard was based on the 1989 ANSI
>standard; after that, all standards were issued directly by ISO.)
>
>(There was a 2003 standard in C++; if you want to discuss that, try
>comp.std.c++.)
>
>[...]

This is a C Forum and I am good with that. I generally try to keep my
discussions separate.

I do find that there is often some overlap in discussions simply
because C++ support most (but not all) features of C.

I think the important point is that newer texts, especially as it get
closer to a new standard ratification, tend to start documenting and
implementing new features and those features that are being
deprecated.

This is, also, true of compiler publishers anticipating what features
must be ready for release in the next generation of compiler products.

So, let's not make any mistaken assumptions about what I want to
discuss.

The original question is the topic, and if we can help him make a
better decision regarding his efforts, let's stick to that.

Respectfully,

MJR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24151

TheGunslinger <mikiesrunsbaal.sec@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<snip>
> Good point about C99. But I believe there was a C standard update in
> 2003?
>
> I am currently reviewing C++ myself, and most of the books published
> recently indicate that they actually incorporate the new standard
> C++11 because it has been out for so long as C++oX (I think). And I
> purchased a new text a few months back that specifically states it is
> updated for the new features according to the 2011 standard.
>
> I pretty much expect that to be true for C though I could be totally
> wrong, but a little research should uncover the most recent versions
> of C-texts and what they cover.

You shouldn't expect that. C and C++ are completely different languages with
different communities. C++ is incomparably more popular in the eyes of the
media and commentators. Expecting the number and vitality of C books to
track that of C++ is like expecting it wrt to Java or Python.

Books are published and updated according to market demand. Without having
to argue that C++ is actually more popular in practice than C, most
inexperienced programmers believe it is. They represent the demographic most
likely to buy these sorts of books--"How to do X in Y"--and that demand
controls the supply.

Also, newer features in C are mostly incremental and rather
straight-forward. The marginal benefit in updating and republishing C books
to include these features isn't nearly as significant as with C++, Java,
etc. That's why the "K&R" book is still a superb introduction to C, and why
the 2nd revision with ANSI function syntax--the last indisputably
significant change in syntax--is still in publication.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24144

Thanks everyone for the suggestion to get a more up-to-date book. I will follow that suggestion. 

Is there away to obtain the new standard specifications for C? Well, is the standard freely described somewhere? ANSI sells the standard publication, right?

I'll check the web for some up-to-date publications, books, on C Data Structures.
ISBNs would be welcomed.  :-)

Again,
 
Thanks Everyone.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24146

Am 02.08.2012 21:22, schrieb gdotone@gmail.com:
> Thanks everyone for the suggestion to get a more up-to-date book. I will follow that suggestion. 
> 
> Is there away to obtain the new standard specifications for C? Well, is the standard freely described somewhere? ANSI sells the standard publication, right?

You'd find versions that are officially drafts but come very close to
the final document here:

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/nXXXX.pdf

where you have to replace XXXX by 1570 for the latest standard (C11) and
1256 for the previous one (C99 plus corigenda).

Jens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24147

On 08/02/2012 03:37 PM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
...
> You'd find versions that are officially drafts but come very close to
> the final document here:
> 
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/nXXXX.pdf
> 
> where you have to replace XXXX by 1570 for the latest standard (C11) and
> 1256 for the previous one (C99 plus corigenda).

Note that 1256 is actually a more useful reference for C99 than the
documents that you have to pay for, because it's the only document that
combines C99 with the three technical corrigenda.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24200

On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 12:22:24 -0700 (PDT), gdotone@gmail.com wrote:

>Thanks everyone for the suggestion to get a more up-to-date book. I will follow that suggestion. 
>
>Is there away to obtain the new standard specifications for C? Well, is the standard freely described somewhere? ANSI sells the standard publication, right?
>
>I'll check the web for some up-to-date publications, books, on C Data Structures.
>ISBNs would be welcomed.  :-)
>
>Again,
> 
>Thanks Everyone.


You can purchase and/or download copies of standard at the NIST or ISO
website: (or other support sites)

The standard is titled:

ISO/IEC 9899:2011

Google it and make your choice.

Here is one URL that works:

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1570.pdf

Respectfully,

MJR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24227

TheGunslinger <mikiesrunsbaal.sec@sbcglobal.net> writes:
[...]
> You can purchase and/or download copies of standard at the NIST or ISO
> website: (or other support sites)
>
> The standard is titled:
>
> ISO/IEC 9899:2011
>
> Google it and make your choice.
>
> Here is one URL that works:
>
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1570.pdf

That URL is for a draft of the C11 standard. It should be nearly
identical to the released standard, but if you want the official
standard itself you can buy it here:

http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=INCITS%2fISO%2fIEC+9899-2012

ANSI charges $30 US for the PDF.

There's also a Technical Corrigendum, available at no charge here:

http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=ISO%2fIEC+9899%2fCor1%3a2012

It just corrects the values of __STDC_VERSION__ and __STDC_LIB_EXT1__,
both of which expand to 201112L.

I didn't see copies of the standard at the NIST web site.

ISO sells the C11 standard for 238 Swiss francs (currently $246.14 US).

It's robably also available from other national standard bodies.  I
don't know whether ANSI sells to non-US customers.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    Will write code for food.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web