Purchasing The Standard

[DaKoadMunky]

After having fancied myself a C++ programmer for the last nine years I figured
it was about time that I actually obtain a copy of the standard rather than
relying on other sources that claim to accurately represent the standard. Even
the best intentioned author or newsgroup poster is capable of inaccurately
representing the standard.

I followed the FAQ link to http://www.techstreet.com/ and searched for 14882 as
suggested.

That brought up the following page...

http://www.techstreet.com/cgi-bin/new_results?searchText=14882&searchType=
docno&newSearch=1&sort=rel&submit.x=15&submit.y=16

Aside from the format in which they are distributed, can anyone tell me the
difference between the various items presented? I am confused about which one
would be the most accurate source of information.

What is the difference between ISO/IEC 14882:2003 and INCITS/ISO/IEC 14882:2003
?

The former can only be purchased as a softcover book for $325. The latter can
be purchased as a PDF document for $18. My broke and unemployed self likes the
latter much better, but I want to be aware of what I won't be getting if I
order it.

Furthermore, how long will it be until the current standard is superceded? If
it is only six-months to a year maybe I should wait. And what about all the
TC's and TR's. Are those freely available or must they also be purchased?

Any insight would be appreciated.

Regards,
Brian F. Seaberg

P.S. I am also thinking about getting TCPPLSE. If I could only buy either the
standard document or the Stroustrup book, which would most recommended? On the
one hand the standard is probably pretty dry reading, but it is authoritative
and I want to know the whole truth. On the other hand the Stroustrup book
probably discusses not only the elements of the language but the best practices
associated with those language elements which may be more appropriate for
someone who isn't going to be writing compilers and tools. I want to know the
language very well, but I can't say I want to be a language lawyer. I would
rather know how to effectively use a subset of the language rather than know
the language inside and out but not know how to apply it effectively.

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

After having fancied myself a C++ programmer for the last nine years I figured
it was about time that I actually obtain a copy of the standard rather than
relying on other sources that claim to accurately represent the standard. Even
the best intentioned author or newsgroup poster is capable of inaccurately
representing the standard.

I followed the FAQ link to http://www.techstreet.com/ and searched for 14882 as
suggested.

That brought up the following page...

http://www.techstreet.com/cgi-bin/new_results?searchText=14882&searchType=
docno&newSearch=1&sort=rel&submit.x=15&submit.y=16

Aside from the format in which they are distributed, can anyone tell me the
difference between the various items presented? I am confused about which one
would be the most accurate source of information.

What is the difference between ISO/IEC 14882:2003 and INCITS/ISO/IEC 14882:2003
?

The former can only be purchased as a softcover book for $325. The latter can
be purchased as a PDF document for $18. My broke and unemployed self likes the
latter much better, but I want to be aware of what I won't be getting if I
order it.

They are the same.

Furthermore, how long will it be until the current standard is superceded? If
it is only six-months to a year maybe I should wait.


Years.


And what about all the
TC's and TR's. Are those freely available or must they also be purchased?

The 14882:2003 is the latest official ISO C++ standard (which contains
fixes of 14882:1998, so it is the 14882:1998 bug-fixed ).

P.S. I am also thinking about getting TCPPLSE. If I could only buy either the
standard document or the Stroustrup book, which would most recommended?

The *book* of course. The standard is intended for the compiler
implementers and if you decide to pursue a career as a language lawyer
in here.

On the
one hand the standard is probably pretty dry reading, but it is authoritative
and I want to know the whole truth. On the other hand the Stroustrup book
probably discusses not only the elements of the language but the best practices
associated with those language elements which may be more appropriate for
someone who isn't going to be writing compilers and tools. I want to know the
language very well, but I can't say I want to be a language lawyer. I would
rather know how to effectively use a subset of the language rather than know
the language inside and out but not know how to apply it effectively.

The book no question. The book will make you not only a better C++
programmer but a better programmer too. It provides much insight.






Regards,

Ioannis Vranos

 

[Andrew Koenig]

What is the difference between ISO/IEC 14882:2003 and INCITS/ISO/IEC 14882:2003
?

The former can only be purchased as a softcover book for $325. The latter can
be purchased as a PDF document for $18. My broke and unemployed self likes the
latter much better, but I want to be aware of what I won't be getting if I
order it.

You can buy the same text, albeit with a different page layout, as a Wiley
book for between $55 and $65, depending on where you look. The book is
called "The C++ Standard", and its ISBN is 0-470-84674-7.

 

[JKop]

DaKoadMunky posted:

After having fancied myself a C++ programmer for the last nine years I
figured it was about time that I actually obtain a copy of the standard
rather than relying on other sources that claim to accurately represent
the standard. Even the best intentioned author or newsgroup poster is
capable of inaccurately representing the standard.

I followed the FAQ link to http://www.techstreet.com/ and searched for
14882 as suggested.

That brought up the following page...

http://www.techstreet.com/cgi-bin/new_results?searchText=14882&searchTyp
e= docno&newSearch=1&sort=rel&submit.x=15&submit.y=16

Aside from the format in which they are distributed, can anyone tell me
the difference between the various items presented? I am confused
about which one would be the most accurate source of information.

What is the difference between ISO/IEC 14882:2003 and INCITS/ISO/IEC
14882:2003 ?

The former can only be purchased as a softcover book for $325. The
latter can be purchased as a PDF document for $18. My broke and
unemployed self likes the latter much better, but I want to be aware of
what I won't be getting if I order it.

Furthermore, how long will it be until the current standard is
superceded? If it is only six-months to a year maybe I should wait.
And what about all the TC's and TR's. Are those freely available or
must they also be purchased?

Any insight would be appreciated.

Regards,
Brian F. Seaberg

P.S. I am also thinking about getting TCPPLSE. If I could only buy
either the standard document or the Stroustrup book, which would most
recommended? On the one hand the standard is probably pretty dry
reading, but it is authoritative and I want to know the whole truth.
On the other hand the Stroustrup book probably discusses not only the
elements of the language but the best practices associated with those
language elements which may be more appropriate for someone who isn't
going to be writing compilers and tools. I want to know the language
very well, but I can't say I want to be a language lawyer. I would
rather know how to effectively use a subset of the language rather than
know the language inside and out but not know how to apply it
effectively.

I have the Standard from 1998. If you want it I'll email it to you. Just
remember to muddle your email address a little, eg.

(e-mail address removed)


Anyone here got the latest Standard and would offer to email it to me?
Sharing is caring.


-JKop

 

[dumboo]

hi i would be really gratefull if u can email me the standard aswell,

vasudev + sharma + 1 + at + hot + mail + .com

 

[Pete C.]

JKop wrote:

I have the Standard from 1998. If you want it I'll email it to you.
Just remember to muddle your email address a little, eg.

(e-mail address removed)


Anyone here got the latest Standard and would offer to email it to me?
Sharing is caring.

Absolutly not. Aside from the fact that that would be a blatent copyright
violation, the PDFs are watermarked with your purchase info to prevent such
abhorrant things.

- Pete

 

[Julie]

JKop wrote:


Absolutly not. Aside from the fact that that would be a blatent copyright
violation, the PDFs are watermarked with your purchase info to prevent such
abhorrant things.

- Pete

Is the PDF protected against printing and/or text-select-copy?

 

[karen]

Pete C. posted:


In my day, when you bought something, it was yours. You could set it on
fire, throw it off a cliff, give it to a friend, or eat it.

-JKop

And, if you treat it like a book, you can only lend it to one person at a
time, and you can't use it while it is lent out. You were going to follow
that at least, right? Copying the book and handing copies out to all your
friends was always illegal, even if you did buy it.

-karen

 

[JKop]

Pete C. posted:

JKop wrote:


Absolutly not. Aside from the fact that that would be a blatent
copyright violation, the PDFs are watermarked with your purchase info
to prevent such abhorrant things.

- Pete

In my day, when you bought something, it was yours. You could set it on
fire, throw it off a cliff, give it to a friend, or eat it.

-JKop

 

[JKop]

dumboo posted:

hi i would be really gratefull if u can email me the standard aswell,

vasudev + sharma + 1 + at + hot + mail + .com

The 1998 version?


-JKop

 

[JKop]

karen posted:

And, if you treat it like a book, you can only lend it to one person at
a time, and you can't use it while it is lent out. You were going to
follow that at least, right? Copying the book and handing copies out
to all your friends was always illegal, even if you did buy it.

-karen

I don't care.

-JKop

 

[Alexander Terekhov]

karen wrote:
[...]

And, if you treat it like a book, you can only lend it to one person at a
time, and you can't use it while it is lent out. You were going to follow
that at least, right?

http://www.copyright.gov/reports/studies/dmca/dmca_executive.html

<quote>

The first sale doctrine is primarily a limitation on the copyright
owner's exclusive right of distribution. It does not limit the
exclusive right of reproduction. While disposition of a work
downloaded to a floppy disk would only implicate the distribution
right, the transmission of a work from one person to another over
the Internet results in a reproduction on the recipient's computer,
even if the sender subsequently deletes the original copy of the
work. This activity therefore entails an exercise of an exclusive
right that is not covered by section 109.

Proponents of expansion of the scope of section 109 to include the
transmission and deletion of a digital file argue that this
activity is essentially identical to the transfer of a physical
copy and that the similarities outweigh the differences. While it
is true that there are similarities, we find the analogy to the
physical world to be flawed and unconvincing.

</quote>

In the totally perverse view of Red Hat, Inc. ("digital first
sale" almost completely nullifies the GPL), Time Warner, Inc.,
etc., teleportation

http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation

would be illigal.

regards,
alexander.

 

[JKop]

Alexander Terekhov posted:

<quote>

The first sale doctrine is primarily a limitation on the copyright
owner's exclusive right of distribution. It does not limit the
exclusive right of reproduction. While disposition of a work
downloaded to a floppy disk would only implicate the distribution
right, the transmission of a work from one person to another over
the Internet results in a reproduction on the recipient's computer,
even if the sender subsequently deletes the original copy of the
work. This activity therefore entails an exercise of an exclusive
right that is not covered by section 109.

Proponents of expansion of the scope of section 109 to include the
transmission and deletion of a digital file argue that this
activity is essentially identical to the transfer of a physical
copy and that the similarities outweigh the differences. While it
is true that there are similarities, we find the analogy to the
physical world to be flawed and unconvincing.

</quote>

So let's go out to international waters with a laptop, copy it onto a
floppy, and come back.

-JKop

 

[Alexander Terekhov]

JKop wrote:
[...]

So let's go out to international waters with a laptop, copy it onto a
floppy, and come back.

Yeah.

< quotes from dmca/sec-104-report-vol-<2|3>.pdf >

Red Hat, Inc.:

Let me just clarify that I don't think anyone today intends to
impact our licensing practices. I haven't seen anything in the
comments, nor have I heard anything today that makes me think
someone does have that intention. What we're concerned about
are unintended consequences of any amendments to Section 109.
The primary difference between digital and nondigital products
with respect to Section 109 is that the former are frequently
licensed. ... product is also available for free downloaded
from the Internet without the printed documentation, without
the box, and without the installation service. Many open source
and free software products also embody the concept of copyleft.
... We are asking that amendments not be recommended that would
jeopardize the ability of open source and free software
licensor to require [blah blah]

Time Warner, Inc.:

We note that the initial downloading of a copy, from an
authorized source to a purchaser's computer, can result in
lawful ownership of a copy stored in a tangible medium.

Library Associations:

First, as conceded by Time Warner, digital transmissions can
result in the fixation of a tangible copy. By intentionally
engaging in digital transmissions with the awareness that a
tangible copy is made on the recipient's computer, copyright
owners are indeed transferring ownership of a copy of the work
to lawful recipients. Second, the position advanced by Time
Warner and the Copyright Industry Organizations is premised
on a formalistic reading of a particular codification of the
first sale doctrine. When technological change renders the
literal meaning of a statutory provision ambiguous, that
provision "must be construed in light of its basic purpose"
and "should not be so narrowly construed as to permit evasion
because of changing habits due to new inventions and
discoveries." Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S.
151, 156-158 (1975). The basic purpose of the first sale
doctrine is to facilitate the continued flow of property
throughout society.

regards,
alexander.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Is the PDF protected against printing and/or text-select-copy?

INCITS/ISO/IEC 14882:2003 is not. I can't comment on other versions.

Alan

 

[dumboo]

The 1998 version?

yeah at,
vthe2 + @ + yahoo +.com

 

[Mats Weber]

I think the standard should be available for free in electronic form, as
is the case for the Ada standard, which is an ISO standard just as C++
is. If it can be done for Ada, why can it not be done for C++ ?

$65, or $18 payable by credit card for a download, puts it out of reach
for schools in many poor countries.

 

[Alexander Terekhov]

I think the standard should be available for free in electronic form, as
is the case for the Ada standard, which is an ISO standard just as C++

Or something like http://www.unix.org/version3/iso_std.html would also
work nicely. C#/CLI is also free in spite of ISO label.

is. If it can be done for Ada, why can it not be done for C++ ?

Lack of independent from ISO standard development, I guess.

http://groups.google.com/[email protected]

regards,
alexander.

 

[JKop]

Mats Weber posted:

I think the standard should be available for free in electronic form, as
is the case for the Ada standard, which is an ISO standard just as C++
is. If it can be done for Ada, why can it not be done for C++ ?

$65, or $18 payable by credit card for a download, puts it out of reach
for schools in many poor countries.

And I think that's a disgrace. Sure I'm even in a 1st World country and I'm
not about to fork over $18 for the thing.

Some-one please email it to me at:

jkop + @ + eircom.net


-JKop

 

[JKop]

Mats Weber posted:

I think the standard should be available for free in electronic form, as
is the case for the Ada standard, which is an ISO standard just as C++
is. If it can be done for Ada, why can it not be done for C++ ?

$65, or $18 payable by credit card for a download, puts it out of reach
for schools in many poor countries.

If you've got the latest Standard, I'd be grateful if you could please email
it to me at:

JKop + @ + eircom + . + net


-JKop