[cynical_german]

Oh my... Are you serious? I'm almost triggered by this. A book about algorithms or data structures from 20 years ago has nothing more to teach? 3D game engine design from 20 years ago has nothing more to teach? No point in looking at the source code of Quake, reading k&r, and Knuth's TAOCP Volume 1 was published in 1968 so it's obviously irrelevant garbage!

I could spurr into an essay of what kind of lack of understanding you just portrayed about the world, but I won't.... I won't...

[koakuma-chan]

We’re talking about C/C++, not algorithms or data structures.

[jpc0]

How you implement algorithms and data structures in C++/rust is semantics at best. The imperative shell of those languages are identical semantically right down to the memory model.

[koakuma-chan]

Right, that's why a 20 year old book on algorithms and data structures is not necessarily outdated, but a 20 year old book on C/C++ most certainly is.

[ryao]

My copy of The C++ Programming Language for C++98 is still useful today, as is copy of The C Programming Language for C89. The idea that these books are no longer useful is absurd. Modern compilers still support those versions and the new versions are largely extensions of the old (although C++11 changed some standard library definitions). The only way you could think this is if you have zero knowledge of these languages.

[koakuma-chan]

> The only way you could think this is if you have zero knowledge of these languages.

Exactly. For context see my original comment above about C/C++ books being paid.

[ryao]

Are you unable to use search engines:

https://www.learn-c.org/

There are so many free learning resources for these languages that it is ridiculous to say that you need books to learn them. The books are great, but non-essential. If you insist on reading books, there is an ancient invention called a library that you can use for free.