OSDev.org

On the other hand, the peer review isn't necessarily of high quality, even for the big publishers. I was a technical reviewer for Addison-Wesley's Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment, 3rd ed. Although I think I did a good job, I was 23 at the time and didn't have great credentials. I still don't understand how I got in. This for me raises the question of whether reviewers are actually that useful on average.

in a small token of a defense of schildt I would say:

1) he was heavily microsoft oriented...

2) microsoft's object system in windows pre-c++ was a horrible design-by-committee try at vtables in C

3) working with that object system for any given amount of time would pollute one's ability to write about early C++ in an effective way (cfront output was not nearly as complex as said C based object system)

In other words, I believe poor schildt was not in a mental state to really give C++ the in-depth coverage he claimed he was....

oh well...

cheers

His C books were just as terrible even though he was on the standards committee. In fact, quite a few other members wrote terrible reviews about his work to try to spread the word. He just doesn't seem to be able to grasp technical material very well.