Does reading a c++ 11 book requires to have knowledge of c++98? [closed]

Question

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.

Closed 8 years ago.

I am currently reading a C++ book written in 2000 which basically means is using c++ 98.(correct me if I am wrong)

My question is, reading a c++11 book like this one (https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0321563840) which most of the users suggest, requires me to have read already a c++98 book?

Answer 1

C++11 is not a separate language. It's just a new version of the existing one. Reading a C++11 book requires whatever prior knowledge that the C++11 book says it requires.

Bjarne's new version of "The C++ Programming Language" expects no prior knowledge of anything. Some other books will expect prior knowledge.

Answer 2

Actually, given the changes from C++98 to C++11, I'd recommend not reading an old book beforehand.

This is because a lot of old methods and idioms have been replaces with much neater constructs and features, which avoid many pitfalls and issues that C++ programmers had to contend with earlier. A coarse comparison would be to read up on relays and electron/vacuum tubes in order to, eventually, understand how to build transistor based logic. No need to start at that end.

So, I recommend you want to read on what's current, then it wouldn't hurt to read an older book to understand why a lot of already existing C++ code was written like it was.

If it's an "what's new in C++11", then you obviously need to know C++98 beforehand.

But as @Nicol says, the book should declare what previous requirements it has.