Anyone trying to learn C++

I've been trying to learn it also, but studying alone makes me get bored of it easily. Anyone interested in learning C++ in a group? it'll be so CACHE (lol, get it?)!

:(

>>53
C++ is poorly designed in every way. Shall I just describe the language to you? Highlights are: context dependence, lack of GC, pointers, a poor object system, weak yet static typing, excess of significant line noise characters, the #include system, lack of keyword arguments, scads of parallel features for everything (each option lacking in a different way), &c. And on top of this, it doesn't even bother to have one thing it really does well.

>>54
None of us are "trying to learn" at all. "Learn"ing Sepples is a matter of keeping appropriate reference books on hand, and making a note of more obscure things you find you need to do often.

>>55
You can have garbage collection that you don't need to manually control in C++ if you want, really, and it has been so for *years*...  some people like to "do it" themselves and some people have specific reasons to do so (perhaps resources are scarce on your embedded system).

It is more strongly typed than C, though if you want you may cast anything to anything else.

Other than that, yeah, it is not the best most well designed language, but most of them are not; even so, it is the best tool to use for some jobs and so it is still useful and a hell of a lot better than writing in assembly directly.