Talk:More C++ Idioms

Why "More"?
Why the title of this book is "More C++ Idioms", instead of simply "C++ Idioms"? More than what? Are there any other C++ idioms? --Carlo.milanesi (talk) 21:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There are several reasons for that: (1) This book has more (and modern) idioms than the earlier book (Advanced C++ ...) by James Coplien. (2) There are certainly more idioms out there than what are listed currently in the book. I expect the number of idioms to grow because C++ is continuously evolving. Hopefully the new ones will be added as they are discovered/invented. (3) Some books on C++ that came in sequence had "More" in their title. For example, Effective C++/More Effective C++, Exceptional C++/More Exceptional C++, and Who's Afraid of C++?/Who's Afraid of MORE C++?! I thought it is cool to follow the tradition because it is second book on idioms. Sutambe (talk) 02:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Table of contents
I think You should rearrange your table of contents. There are few fields that currently link to the same URL, is it temporary or would it be the same in the final version? if it's not temporary than i think you should group them together.

Thanks

Idiom = pattern?
Is there a reason for using the word "idiom" over "pattern"? All here looks so familar with what I would call a "pattern".

I think "Idiom" is more a "common name for something" to me than "the whole something" (which is the pattern). Also, pattern is very wide-spread, especially in non-C++ areas and these people seem to be a major interest group for the book (moderate level = people coming from other languages?). Note that I am coming from the Java world, where it's all about the word "pattern" (or at least much more ;-)

I think that patterns are programming language independent, whereas idioms are programming language dependent; therefore Idiom != pattern. Most of the usage of the word "pattern" is about design patterns, not programming patterns. Looking up Merriam-Webster dictionary:

idiom(2): an expression in the usage of a language that is peculiar to itself either grammatically (as no, it wasn't me) or in having a meaning that cannot be derived from the conjoined meanings of its elements.

pattern(1) : a form or model proposed for imitation

pattern(2) : something designed or used as a model for making things

pattern(3) : an artistic, musical, literary, or mechanical design or form

On the other side, if this wikibook contains something that is actually more a pattern than an idiom, I think it should be removed. --Carlo.milanesi (talk) 00:44, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Page completion indicators
I've noticed that a lot of the pages on this book are marked as '75%' complete with. I'd be in favour of updating quite a lot of these to be 100%, unless anyone has any particular objections. I see the 100% mark as meaning that the text is high quality, and that nothing necessary is missing from the text. I don't think text needs to be utterly unimprovable or not have any content that could be added in order to achieve this mark. What do other people think? If I don't hear back, I'll probably go ahead and update some of the indicators, but this shouldn't be taken to be an irreversible change. If you can see missing content, feel free to knock the marker back down to 75% and detail on the talk page what content you feel is missing. --Fishpi (discuss • contribs) 21:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm fine with that. Sutambe (discuss • contribs) 16:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Merge?
Would it be appropriate to request a merging of wikibooks, I don't really have a specific wikibook in mind other than perhaps C++ Programming I feel that it could be added under a section like C++ Programming/Code/Design Patterns and the move would unite communities and potentially increase content development speed as well as create a better unified C++ programming wikibook so users don't have to store many bookmarks/links/references. I feel that this helps out everyone in the long run, by joining forces with the 'competition' you can work together to create something everyone agrees on and is easier to share with others than fragmented resources. That's just my 2 cents Zenware (discuss • contribs) 00:50, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I disagree idioms are not design patterns and most of all they are not GoF design patterns. --95.94.177.180 (discuss) 09:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)