Should we create a blacklist of sources?

[Austin J]

Sometimes I notice newcomers are consistently using bad tools or sources.

For example, it's taken quite a while to get people to quit using the outdated Bloodshed Dev C++ .

There's also sources like CodingMadeEasy, and I'm sorry but I hate how he does a lot of things. I.e using #define over declaring a constant in C++ in a SFML tutorial I recall.

Or people try to learn with thenewboston, which isn't necessarily that bad, but I'd consider it more supplemental because he gives shallow understandings and has annoying quirks like stupid naming.

Is it just me, or would it be a good idea to organize a list of the things beginners should distance themselves or simply steer clear of?

[fabtasticwill]

If your going to do that, make sure the list has detailed explanations for each item, explaining why they're on the list.

[Little Bobby Tables]

i would suggest taking a look at what ##c and ##c++ has, because they have quite an extensive list of where to and not to go (ie exactly what you were talking about making), and it would be stupid not to just steal that. although, we are on that list. just as an fyi

[Duthomhas]

I can try to put something like that in the FAQ (and I believe I have some stuff there already in the "intro" section).

The problem with this is that it is a massive undertaking to construct and maintain. I think it would be easier to maintain a link to SO's good C and C++ books pages:

C++
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/388242/the-definitive-c-book-guide-and-list

C
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/562303/the-definitive-c-book-guide-and-list

As well as Yechiel Kimchi's C Books and C++ Books You Don't Want ! site:
http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/users/yechiel/CS/BadBooksC+C++.html

If it would help, I can craft a FAQ page specifically for this issue that people can link in responses.


The real problem, though, is that people beginning with C and C++ are overwhelmed by the variety of offerings, and often enough sellers of these books don't make it easy to figure out that a given book or author is craptastic. Hence, resources have already been committed (money spent) on a bad book, only to have the unwary newbie posting here for help understanding something.

The other problem, almost as horrible, is that C and C++ educational systems outside of the Western world often employs bad books, technologies, and pedagogies. For example, whenever someone posts a problem with Borland C++, take a careful look and you will find that said poster is almost always from India or environs. It's not the poster's fault -- his academic institution is using software that is twenty years old.

It all comes down to money.


When someone posts that they are using Dev-C++, maybe suggest they upgrade to wxDev-C++. It is easy enough and the environment is still the familiar, but superior and up-to-date and maintained one that they need to do anything serious. Links help:
http://wxdsgn.sourceforge.net/
Download and installation is a breeze.

(Especially compared to saying something like "git yerself clang" to people on Windows, etc.)


Perhaps an OS-specific "get me" for beginners? (Stuff that's free, downloads and installs easily, plus instructions? Like a simple how to use apt-get or yum, etc.)

Things to think about.

[Albatross]

Duoas wrote:

When someone posts that they are using Dev-C++, maybe suggest they upgrade to wxDev-C++.

Obligatory annoying PSA.

wxDev-C++ hasn't had a release since October 2011 (version 7.4). The last update to the trunk was over 2 years ago, IIRC (see http://sourceforge.net/projects/wxdsgn/ under "Last Update").

I think Orwell Dev-C++ is still going strong, though.
http://orwelldevcpp.blogspot.com/

EDIT: On the topic, though, I think this would be a good idea under the condition that blacklisted sources would be occasionally checked and removed from the blacklist if they have corrected their errors. There is a risk of that list becoming highly political or being used to dismiss otherwise valid claims from dubious sources. Still, if used properly, I could see it being beneficial for new tutors and new programmers alike.

-Albatross

[Duthomhas]

Disclosure: I never use Dev-C++, never have, and have never had any desire to do so.
So, re: use Orwell Dev-C++; duly noted.

Thanks!

[Cody0023]

My university still points students to downloading Quincy if they don't have a compiler. It's sad lol.