Re: VS 2005
From: Hendrik Schober (SpamTrap_at_gmx.de)
Date: 01/14/05
- Next message: Lizim: "Extracting Data from a Text File in C#"
- Previous message: Hendrik Schober: "Re: Read text based file on double-click"
- In reply to: Ronald Laeremans [MSFT]: "Re: VS 2005"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 13:06:34 +0100
Ronald Laeremans [MSFT] <ronaldl@online.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >> So we always try to give users 1 release time
> >> to
> >> adjust to the changed behavior before making it the default in cases
> >> where
> >> that is an option and where the change of behavior is as big as in the 2
> >> /Zc
> >> options.
> >
> > I don't see the point in doing this. All
> > it does is making your customers write
> > even more lines that will give problems.
>
> It allows them to adopt the new version of the compiler and then decide on
> their won time to do the work to their code base to make the changes.
This sounds good in theory. In reality,
however, changes are introduced steadily
with each new version.
So when your customers adopt version X of
the compiler there's a change that was
already introduced in X-1, but which,
since X-1 defaulted to the behaviour of
X-2, they never notized. Now they either
loose time by changing the code they had
written between X-1 and X (atop of older
code, that is) or they just have throw
the compatibility switch.
The first will most likely steal them
time and prevents them from realizing
that there are more changes introduced
with X which are agin hidden by the
compiler which uses the old behaviour by
default. So they'll face the very same
problem with the next version.
The second they could have done just as
well when X-1 was released.
Sorry, but I still fail to see the
advantage.
> Having
> the option, but having the default immediately work the other way should
> accomplish the same, but in our experience means that an inordinate number
> of customers get so scared by the initial build failures they just decide
> not to upgrade and many don't even do a before further investigation.
So why not have a all-in-one switch for
compatibility with X-1, and maybe even
X-2? Whoever wants can throw that and go
on compiling and hacking old-style code.
If well advertized, everyone able to
read should be able to do that. I mean,
everyone using this product is dealing
with a language that has abstract virtual
base classes, class template partial
specialization -- while missing function
template partial specialization! --, and
comes with exceptions, but no GC, except
if they throw a switch -- by which they
get a very different language!
Heck, you could even bring in a wizard
that sets up or imports old projects so
that the code compiles.
> Ronald
Schobi
-- SpamTrap@gmx.de is never read I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org "The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be prefered to those thinking they've found it." Terry Pratchett
- Next message: Lizim: "Extracting Data from a Text File in C#"
- Previous message: Hendrik Schober: "Re: Read text based file on double-click"
- In reply to: Ronald Laeremans [MSFT]: "Re: VS 2005"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
