Want to learn C++? Here's the best way to do it

If you want to be a serious software professional, eventually you will need to learn C++ (pronounced "c plus plus"). You can avoid it and dodge it for as long as you want, but it's inevitable.

There are several good books about it, some of which I've mentioned here before. But I think the best resource today for learning or relearning C++ is the online tutorial, Learn C++. 

Learn C++ is an exceptional piece of work. It's easy to follow. It avoids a lot of the mess that burdens most other C++ resources.

The site is modest and uncluttered. It gets down to the business of teaching you C++, and it doesn't do anything else. And it's constantly updated. 

The craziest part about Learn C++ is that it's absolutely free. It's supported by ads and by user contributions. The ads are not obnoxious, and since the site gets a small amount of $$ every time someone clicks on an ad, I make sure to click on a few of them every time I view a new page. As far as user contributions go, it does not nag you for them, and it doesn't even advertise them. I had to dig through the site to find that information. 

Word Peeve: Case in Point

 I'm not sure about its origin, but the phrase "case in point" sounds like a legal term, something that originated in a courtroom or a lawyer's brief.

Here's an example of its usage. Please don't debate me on the content of the example. I'm only using it to illustrate the usage of "case in point".

Too many students are getting away with violent behavior, and we've already started down the slippery slope that will end in real tragedy. Case in point: last week a teacher was knocked unconscious and savagely beaten by a 17-year-old student who had been arrested three times previously for assault.

"Case in point" can be interpreted as "Here's a case which illustrates the point I was trying to make." Note that the colon is important. A comma won't do. I'm serious here.

Why do so many people mistakenly say or write "case and point"? "Case and point" makes absolutely no sense. It sounds dumb.

Today I saw something even dumber. It appeared on Reddit, and it was used, ironically, by someone who is expected to know how English really works. What did they write? "Point and case, ..." 

For more information: If you're still reading this, here's an article about the origin and usage of "case in point". 

 - - -

Bonus peeve: earlier this week, I also read the phrase "for all intensive purposes," from someone else whom we expect to know English better than they do.

Why Paying Teachers More Would Help to fix our Educational System

Bottom line at the top:

Money won't cure all of the ills in education, but it will bring back a lot of the lost talent, and that will go a long way towards fixing things.

Now, the details:

A recent post on Reddit's r/Teachers subgroup postulated that the reason for the decay in education is "slack parenting and scared administrations." (Please note: this is copy-and-pasted. Errors are the original poster's errors, not mine.)

My take: Society doesn't realize that in just a very few years there will be almost no teachers who will put up with the abusive students, the parents who refuse to parent and the slack administrations who cow to obnoxious parents, for fear of a lawsuit.

They have no idea the crap that is going to hit, and the dramatic affect its going to have on society. Or maybe they do but don't have the bleep's to state it and act on it.

All administration's everywhere will continue to blame Covid and income disparity and socio- emotional in learning lacks, because no one would dare speak what needs spoken. It's so much more PC to blame nebulous, ambiguous, non-actionable entities than it is to hold the only parties that CAN make a difference accountable. 

The poster hit the nail square on the proverbial head. Bulls-eyed it. Aced it. Got it in one. But there's more.

Here's my response:

That's a big part of it. I think that we need to keep the focus on teacher pay, as well.

As long as would-be teachers can make more money for less work (and stress) (and no bullshit from the aforementioned admins and parents) elsewhere, those would-be teachers will continue to take jobs elsewhere. And current teachers will quit and leave the profession and go elsewhere, for the same reasons.

We have lost a lot of really good teaching talent to corporate America, because we're not willing to fight for them, to compete for them -- to attract them back to teaching. Teaching right now is a singularly unattractive profession. If you listen, you can hear the departing teachers muttering, "They don't pay me enough to put up with this shit," as they walk out the door.

Simply giving more money to the school districts is not the way to fix this. Most of the "more money" that we give to the districts gets siphoned off for capital improvements, mandates, pet projects, and back-office salaries. Very little of it ends up in the teachers' pockets. We have to find a way to get the money directly to the teachers.

Money won't cure all of the ills in education, but it will bring back a lot of the lost talent, and that will go a long way towards fixing things.

p.s. I'm convinced that those teachers who are still teaching have angel wings hidden under their jackets. Y'all are awesome. These comments are not intended to diminish you in any way.