Is Essential C++ the worst C++ book of all?
Reviewed by Conrad Weisert, February 6, 2000


Stanley Lippman: Essential C++ , 2000, Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-48518-4, 270 pages.

Long shrift:
We're giving this one more space than usual for a negative review. A new book from a well-known author and a respected publisher shouldn't be dismissed without a careful analysis and complete explanation.


Among the glut of C++ books

I'm often asked to recommend the best C++ book for a course text or for self-study. That's a tough call. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of them, far too many to get acquainted with.

In the future, however, I'll have no trouble coming up with the worst C++ book I've seen. If there's a worse one out there than Essential C++ I hope I never encounter it. Stanley Lippman confronts his readers with a stream of silly examples, grotesquely misguided coding techniques, opaque writing, and just plain errors. This book has no redeeming qualities and is appropriate for no audience.

C++ with its standard libraries and vendor libraries is by far the largest language in the history of programming, vastly more complicated than PL/I, Ada, or Algol-68 which used to get criticized for being too big. Tackling a well-chosen subset, therefore, is an appropriate pedagogical approach. Gregory Satir's 198-page C++: the Core Language is more readable and far more sensible than Mr. Lippman's new book.

What's "Essential"?

In reviewing the same author's C++ Primer I observed that it's anything but a primer. The scope of Essential C++ is anything but essential from the point of view of an applications programmer. Addison-Wesley needs help in choosing titles for Mr. Lippman's books.

So just what does Mr. Lippman view as "essential" for an applications programmer just starting to learn C++?

It's as if a C++ compiler is an interesting plaything rather than a tool for serious software development.

Out of sorts

The second chapter introduces (p. 42) a simple selection sort routine and then develops several versions of it. Mr. Lippman misidentifies it each time as "bubble sort"!

The bubble sort algorithm is well known, but this isn't it. Addison-Wesley editors, if they still have any, should have caught that, since they publish books that get it right (e.g. Robert Sedgewick: Algorithms, ISBN 0-201-06673-4). That terminology is long-established2 and not subject to new coinage.

An extra iteration in the outer loop doesn't affect the result, but may momentarily confuse the reader who just learned a few pages earlier how the for statement works.

Whether to leave temporary debugging output statements in a program is open to debate, but when we do so we normally turn it on or off by a switch (internal, macro, global) unknown to the calling routine. Providing an optional ostream parameter (p. 51) in a sort routine (to route debugging output to a file of the calling program's choice) is way too bizarre; an undergraduate student who did that on an exercise would earn a stern comment from the instructor and at most a grade of C.

Strange notation

Mr. Lippman appends an empty parameter list to the name of every function regardless of the function's parameter-list signature. In fact he calls "foo()" (p. 35) a function name. This odd convention, which serves no apparent purpose, persists thoughout the text and the exercises. That gets awfully confusing, for example when exercise 5.1 advises the student to build a Stack class that

"supports the following interface: pop(), push(), size(), empty(), full(), peek(), print()"
Clearly some of those methods (empty()) have empty parameter lists , while others (push(item)) don't.

In the case of operator*() the convention is completely ambiguous, offering no clue as to whether the multiplication or the dereferencing operator was intended.

Bad practices

Whatever we may think of the writing, the structure, and the accuracy this text is riddled with examples of bad programming practice, ranging from mildly regrettable to grotesquely misguided. I'll just list them in no particular order of importance:

One can be an authority on a programming language without knowing much about programming.3

Not recommended


1 Conrad Weisert: "Making C++ Practical for Business Applications: 3 Essential Classes" ACM SIGPLAN Notices, December, 1995.

2 Other sources for the bubble-sort algorithm include:

3 This observation is often made these days about insiders in the "Java community". The phenomenon is certainly growing with the emergence of each new technology.

Return to book reviews.
Return to IDI home page.