The back cover of C++: The Language raises questions not answered by front cover(devblogs.microsoft.com) |
The back cover of C++: The Language raises questions not answered by front cover(devblogs.microsoft.com) |
Recruiter: Hey there! <indicates the code> Do you know what this is?
Colleague: Err, <looks…thinks for a bit>… It *looks* like some sort of network protocol
Recruiter: <smug> No, it’s *COMPUTER CODE* ISBN = 9780199226559
SELECT * FROM military_bases
On a public dataset :)
Considering the book's title is almost identical to Bjarne Stroustrup's book, it smells like an attempt to profit by confusing buyers.
Probably not a good look back at publishing hq
My understanding is that authors often have little or not control over the covers chosen by their publishers.
It's at least possible that the book itself is excellent, but I'm not going to spend $90+ on a hardcover copy to find out.
I have not seen much, if any, JavaScript developers touching C++ modules much beyond library authors needing bindings for SQLite, etc.
While C++ was just a simple iteration, C³ aims to be a paradigm shift. If you see JavaScript DOM manipulation code on a C++ book cover, it’s not a stock photo blunder anymore — it’s just a valid source file after a custom EBNF header. The project is currently in private development, but I'm considering launching it as an online service. Stay tuned!
Most textbooks sold are bought by students because they were required for a course. Students are not choosing a textbook by cover because they're not choosing a textbook at all. Professors choosing which textbook to assign are doing so based on the content, because that's what they'll be teaching. Professors also get a lot of free sample copies, and are probably choosing between those instead of purchasing their own set of candidates based on the cover.
fwiw, i stopped keepin up with c++ in 2003. saved my sanity!
This book's title is a little different.
There have always been people trying to push low-effort, low-value things as high-value things by copying the superficial aspects of high-value things. People literally do "judge a book by its cover", and can be tricked into buying it even when the contents are worthless.
People in a bookshop don't want to have to read entire chapters of each book they're thinking of buying in order to be sure they're all legitimate books of value. They want the bookseller to have done that for them, and know every book in the shop had at least some effort put into it.
The internet is not a bookshop. An enshittified platform like Amazon is not a bookshop. If a slopmaker can pay a platform to tout absolute slop, you now can't trust the platform. It's all so tiresome.
It's now just easier to perform that dishonesty and waste even more people's time than ever before.
Effort-free stock image on the front cover, generic copy-paste description on the back cover. Hard to tell if whoever was responsible for the cover design is worried about his job being replaced with AI, because if he is, he has an odd way of showing it.
I guess the brilliant hacking was the bit you don’t see getting access to the super secure database in the first place?
Knowing how to write native modules is one blog post less on "We rewrote X in Y" on HN frontage.
You might argue why not using something else in first place, well in consulting quite often we have tl adapt to the customer IT stack.
Concrete example deploying into Vercel Functions, and there is a small performance boost required.
Nowadays I would rather push for Go or Rust runtime, but until this year they weren't officially supported, as they were community runtime builds.
In any case, I expect someone doing backend development to actually understand performance, and how to improve it.
As someone who's done lots of backend development _in_ node though, I'm not really proficient in C++ enough nor I ever had teams able to maintain such modules.
I'm not criticizing your approach, mind you, it's absolutely understandable, just uncommon for someone to be really proficient at both languages.