Packt publishing is a strange situation : some of the books it makes are very suspicious, and it seems that there is no proper technical review for them (or the authors are lazy , or maybe even not knowledgeable!). For example , a book that has reached 2nd edition, "Expert C++" has still (on the 2nd edition, as it was in the 1st edition) , on chapter 14 , paragraph "Avoid memory leaks", they have an example with the line : std::auto_ptr p(new T()); //other smart pointers is OK also when the auto_ptr is deprecated in C++11 and removed in C++17 ! And the authors still give it as an example in the 2nd edition! How can the reader trust anything in this book then? It is not a simple typographical error.
Packt publishing is a strange situation : some of the books it makes are very suspicious, and it seems that there is no proper technical review for them (or the authors are lazy , or maybe even not knowledgeable!). For example , a book that has reached 2nd edition, "Expert C++" has still (on the 2nd edition, as it was in the 1st edition) , on chapter 14 , paragraph "Avoid memory leaks", they have an example with the line :
std::auto_ptr p(new T()); //other smart pointers is OK also
when the auto_ptr is deprecated in C++11 and removed in C++17 ! And the authors still give it as an example in the 2nd edition! How can the reader trust anything in this book then? It is not a simple typographical error.