Re: Is VC++ any "better" than C#?

On Jul 18, 2:03 pm, "Peter Duniho" <NpOeStPe...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:41:23 -0700, jmDesktop <needin4mat...@xxxxxxxxx>  
wrote:

Thanks.  One example I came across was video capture.  There are folks
out there that have written .net wrappers, but they do not appear to
be "official" and state things like "Don't use this in production."

Well, that's an interesting example, if for no other reason than that the  
DirectShow video capture stuff is a reasonably straight-forward and  
natural thing to access from .NET using the p/invoke stuff.  You may be  
referring to the DirectShow.NET project, which I haven't used but  
understand to be a pretty good wrapper for DirectShow.

As far as it not being "official" and not for "use in production", that  
sort of thing is true for pretty much anything you find outside the normal  
Microsoft API documentation.  Even plain old C++ samples often come with a  
similar caveat.

Personally, I don't think I'd ever write "don't use this in production" in  
any sample code I make available, but I certainly feel that there's an  
implied "use at your own risk" that goes along with _any_ sample code.

Well, if I do and it breaks, then when can I say?  "Uh, I used this
guy's stuff off of CodeProject and yeah, he said not too."  If I'm
going to use it I have to understand it to maintain it.

That's true...if you're going to incorporate some code into your own  
projects, it may behoove you to understand what the code is doing.  If  
nothing else, doing otherwise risks getting someone's trojan hidden in  
your own code.  :)

But to some extent, it's hard to know where to draw the line.  If a  
component you use in your own code comes from a trusted source, do you  
really need to know how it works?  After all, I assume you haven't tried  
to examine the implementation of .NET to determine for yourself how it  
works, even though much of .NET is basically just a wrapper on the  
unmanaged Windows API.

Likewise, if you find a library that you can use in your own .NET code and  
which has a public API that is completely defined in terms of managed  
code, as long as you trust the source, does it matter whether you know  
exactly what's going on within the library?

Again, I realize in some such cases there may be warning against using the  
library in production code, but to a large extent I believe that those  
kinds of warnings are "CYA" measures.  Any rational, thinking person  
should be able to make a decision for themselves as to whether a publicly  
available code sample or library is actually of high enough quality to use  
in production code, regardless of whatever warnings come with it, with the  
expectation that with adequate testing one can confirm or refute any  
assumption of quality.

[...] I have had some C++, just
beginner stuff, so I can follow it and know what the constructs mean,
but that's about it.  It's the low level stuff that I'd like to know
how to do because it seems to come in handy at times when looking at
MS's documentation.

Well, as I said...I do believe that there's value in learning the  
unmanaged API as well as being familiar enough with C/C++ to navigate any  
example code related to the unmanaged API.  So if you're of the mind to  
learn that, by all means do.  But I wouldn't consider it a prerequisite to  
writing .NET code, and it may be that you will find it just as effective  
to learn as you go along, inasmuch as you need that knowledge at all.

Pete

I think I have/had a fundemental misunderstanding here. Does VC++ use
the .NET runtime? I was thinking it did and was just another language
choice like C# or VB.NET. I thought this because all the express
editions were on the same download page. Is VC++ totally separate?

Thanks again.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is VC++ any "better" than C#?
    ... Well, that's an interesting example, if for no other reason than that the DirectShow video capture stuff is a reasonably straight-forward and natural thing to access from .NET using the p/invoke stuff. ... As far as it not being "official" and not for "use in production", that sort of thing is true for pretty much anything you find outside the normal Microsoft API documentation. ... After all, I assume you haven't tried to examine the implementation of .NET to determine for yourself how it works, even though much of .NET is basically just a wrapper on the unmanaged Windows API. ... Again, I realize in some such cases there may be warning against using the library in production code, but to a large extent I believe that those kinds of warnings are "CYA" measures. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: SyncronizingProxyFactory: Pattern or antipattern?
    ... The problem is that the appropriate granularity of synchronisation depends on ... rather than by the boundaries between the actual methods in the API. ... issue that can have global ramifications for the design of an application, ... The greatest danger is that the code which uses the wrapper /may/ be ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Probleme mit =?ISO-8859-15?Q?gro=DFen_Quelltextdateien?=
    ... Die API kann ich nicht verändern, also entstand die Idee, einen C++ Wrapper um die API herum zu bauen. ... Als ich nun den Wrapper-Code in das Projekt einbinde und compiliere, bekomme ich zunächst einmal einen "C1061: Compilerlimit: Blöcke zu tief geschachtelt". ... Eine Recherche im Web ergibt, dass bei Visual Studio .NET 2002 unter Q315481 ein Bug bekannt war, bei welchem nach etwa 250 For-Schleifen nacheinander dieser Fehler auftritt. ...
    (microsoft.public.de.vc)
  • Re: win api wrapper
    ... Usually such an API wrapper would be realized by a type library. ... The type library has to give one declaration for each of the API ... E.g. the Windows API has two different functions ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.winapi)
  • Re: Is it possible to retrieve sent email message in Opennetcf?
    ... I can think of absolutely no reason, other than a contractual obligation to ... InTheHand, such as reading sent sms and sent email messages, will cost ... Do you think that its not worthiet to write the wrapper on my own? ... Paul G. Tobey wrote: ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.compactframework)
Loading