This book was chosen as the textbook for the AP Computer Science C++ class at my school. Having programmed in C++ for quite a while, I must say I was disappointed. Most all of the basics are covered, and I believe a beginner would, after reading this book, "know" C++. However, the style of teaching isn't that great, and the order in which things are taught isn't the best either. Also, much of the code appears untested, and contains errors. The code also does not conform to the ANSI/ISO standard. I've read much worse, but I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone who asked me about C++, and I definately would not use it to teach a CS class.

-Alan Johnson

This book is intended to be a textbook for an introductory programming course for students who have never programmed before. You may agree or disagree with the premise (I disagree), but you have to admire the authors for trying.

What's in the book is pretty decent. The writing is clear. The examples are simple and clear enough to read without straining your brain. The authors do cover some fairly advanced topics, such as multiple inheritance and templates, but they concentrate on explaining the basics and make little attempt to cover the weird stuff and pitfalls of the language. You need a more advanced book for that.

Because the organization, writing, and index are better than average, I find that I am continuing to use this book. (I don't usually keep tutorial-type books after the first reading.)

I would recommend this book to undergrad students and beginning programmers who want to learn C++ or to anyone who wants an easy-to-read overview of the language. For advanced programmers who know C, Bruce Eckel's book "Thinking in C++" is a better choice.

This is the only book which attempts to comprehensively report the activities of the ICTR and ICTY. It does not do that real well. It is poorly organized and difficult to wade through.

An essential guide to the case-law of the ICTY and ICTR. Also highly useful for those working on the International Criminal Court.

I thought that this would be good, but it stunk! The ending is so bland that I almost threw up. Please don't read this book or waste your money and/or time reading this. Please don't! Maybe the next one will be better - I haven't read it.

Even though I haven't read all the Bailey School Kids Books thier all VERY GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! READ THIS BOOK!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Would you like to solve a mystery? Well Jigsaw Jones did in The Case of the Great Sled Race. It was written by James Preller. In this book I learned not to steal. I liked this book because I like mystery.

This catalogue is an art book with 69 paintings by 61 artists of the nineteenth and early 20th century, "that focuses on the avant-garde movements of Paris..." It showcases The Beck Collection, part of the permanent collection of The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, which - following its recent expansion - is now the eighth largest in the United States. (NOTE: Most - if not all! - of these works are on display in the new $83 million, 192,447-square-foot Audrey Jones Beck Building.) --- I took this book to the museum, and compared its reproductions to several pieces of the artwork while seated before them. I took notes. My thoughts follow: (1) This book displays the paintings sans their frames... anyone who has gone through the arduous process of selecting a frame is aware that the frame color (and background wall!) as well as the lighting trick the eye into seeing some colors more intensely than others. Several works 'looked different' and the discrepancy seemed due to the absence of the frame. For example, Jean-Baptiste-Armand Guillaumin's "Le Seine a Paris" (1871), framed in a ornate, sand-colored frame decorated with acanthus leaves, appears much gloomier in reality than it does in this book. In this volume it appears quite 'naked'! (2) Unfortunately the colors and darkness/lightness of the reproductions frequently vary enough from the originals to be noticeable. Camille Pissarro's "La Gardeuse d'oies a Montfoucalt, gelee blanche" (1875), for instance, is much lighter in the original than in the book. The reproduction's blues tended to the purple and even the sunlit areas seem in shadow, whereas in the original they are possessed of that piercing winter light that filters down during a cold mid-afternoon. The dying leaves in the tree are muddled and dull compared to the painting itself. In Mary Cassatt's "Susan Consolant l'enfant (c1881) the oranges and blues are very true to the original, but the entire reproduction has a yellow cast, unlike the painting. (Curiously enough, the absence of a frame does NOT make any difference in one's enjoyment of this work!) (3) I was quite upset to discover, looking at Gustave Caillebotte's "Les Orangers" (1878), that a full 1/8th of an inch (of the reproduction in the tome) had been CROPPED off, both left and right! The left side was not distracting, but on the right the damage is serious, since a chair, with hooped top and round seat, are tangent to the edge of the original, but are cropped off in the book. For those (like myself) who enjoy finding the geometries in a painting (Golden Rectangles, squares, etc), this makes such a study impossible... Incidentally, this painting is also marred by the shift problem noted previously; the entire reproduction is lighter than the original. (The poppies look red in the painting, and orange in this work). --- All said and done, the work is unique, and printing technology is not perfect. This is NOT a bad book; it just needs to be used with some understanding of its limitations. The format incidentally is that each reproduction (right page) is faced by text (left page) describing the work, the artist, etc. --- Hopefully visitors to Houston will take the time to see the originals: they are gorgeous!

Like all the early books in this series, this was a superb commentary when it first appeared (in 1910; the 2nd edition of 1930 has a new, very long, introduction but is otherwise unrevised) but is now quite elderly. Most of the historical background is obsolete and best ignored. It adopts an extremely critical stance, much of which is discredited and even quaint. However, the book is not yet worthless, because it has a still unrivalled analysis of the Hebrew grammar and an extensive treatment of textual variants from the Septuagint and elsewhere. Don't throw it away, but supplement it with a couple of newer works, such as the three volume magnum opus of Westermann.

While it's fascinating to someone who is doing intense studies in this period of Bretagne history the general writing style of the book is really a bit too highbrow for the casual scholar or amateur historian. The tone is very scholarly, and it frequently will use rather obscure terms where a more clear one would do. It assumes that you read both French and Latin, and will veer off into one or sometimes both of those languages in the middle of sentences. That's really the biggest problem with the book, and the reason I gave it only 3 stars. Beyond that though both the book and the attendant notes, while a bit dry, are very useful, and contain a great deal of important and frequently overlooked information on the post civil war period in Brittany, and the attempts, ultimately disastrous, at establishing Bretagne independence from France.

While Empson's posthumous publication, "Faustus and the Censor," first came out in the 1980's, it remains a relevant document in Christopher Marlowe criticism. The oft-disputed authenticity of Marlowe's play "Doctor Faustus," and its two versions, the A and B-texts is the main focus of Empson's book. Empson begins with the beginning - Marlowe's sources, primarily the German Faust Book. Empson discusses the possible relationship with the translator of English Faust Book, a mysterious gentleman named 'P.F.' who may have provided Marlowe with information on German and Latin texts.

Empson's thesis is that the A text is the 'original' - but that its seeming inadequacies are due to the interference of the official censor of plays in the late 1500s. Scenes missing that Empson argues were removed for reasons of state and morality are an appearance of the chorus and an episode in a Turkish harem.

The censor, Empson argues, had three major problems with Marlowe's play that required change: 1)the women Faustus consorts with must be real women - because Anglican belief did not allow that devils could consort with humans. 2)Mephistopheles must be a devil - again, Anglicanism does not allow for middle spirits. 3)Faust must be punished eternally at the end of the play; apparently, the original version when acted, left some ambiguity about this issue.

Empson's "Faust and the Censor" tends to be somewhat repetitive on supporting these points. However, the repetition is done well, so that the points he makes are continuously reinforced and consistently developed. This is an engaging piece of literary criticism - the language is familiar, even colloquial, making the book an interesting and even entertaining read - very unusual in the field of literary criticism. I don't even like Marlowe, but Empson's style and substance make this a critical work worth checking out.

Ah, the Reagan years ... when Newt Gingrich was a rising star, Bill Clinton was an obscure Southern governor, and Republicans knew Congress was the enemy. Within just a few years, the same people and institutions who railed against the 'imperial Congress' would find themselves in control of that institution. By that time, the White House was the enemy again, and Republicans devoted their energy and determination to rolling back the presidency and using Congress as an engine of 'reform.'

As a monument of that earlier, innocent era, this book has three elements: an indictment of Congressional abuses of power, an analysis of the 'separation of powers' doctrine, and policy prescriptions for the late 1980s and beyond. Of these, the last is largely outdated now and the first is incomplete: the problem isn't that Congress is too powerful vis-à-vis the presidency, or vice versa, but rather that *both* branches have far too much power (just for good measure, so does the judiciary), and *both* should be severely, brutally, uncompromisingly scaled back.

The middle element, the analysis of 'separation of powers,' still stands up fifteen years later, however, and is worth a read for students of political science.

Sometimes books can't help but to cover dry material. This book does not excell past being extremely dry. The book is well documented, thorough, and comprehensive. The eight edition is aesthically pleasing, but still does not seem to achieve the ability to make itself an easy read. I would highly recommend another book for this study, or using this one as background information for study.