Re: Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- From: "Larry Smith" <no_spam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:11:28 -0500
I have no C++/CLI
experience per se so I can't speak to that but I really have to ask, does
it
really offer anything that C# doesn't.
If you've been using C# for 2 years, you'll presumably be familiar
with "using" - so that's one thing C++/CLI doesn't need, and more
importantly there's no need to guess when you ought to use "using".
I assume you're referring to the using "statement" for cleaning up resources
via "IDisposable" opposed to the using "directive" for eliminating the
explicit use of namespaces (or for creating aliases). This is a relatively
trivial issue IMO and one that's fairly well-defined. I don't think there's
as much guess-work here as you're suggesting. Sometimes there is but I think
it's more the fault of the .NET docs which are very weak IMO. I do agree
that it's ugly compared to a C++ destructor however (if this is what you're
alluding to) and have even argued that in past (in the C# NG). I'm sure
C++/CLI has its own warts however and it's certainly no reason to pick
C++/CLI over C#.
And of course, it has seamless access to native C/C++ code.
Also a trivial issue for most applications IMO but I agree that it is a
problem. This has nothing to do with C# however. The .NET framework simply
hasn't closed the gap but it will probably narrow it in time. Of course it
never could completely close the gap and hope to remain platform neutral.
Nevertheless, I've had to do some of my own nasty P/Invoking so your point
is well-taken. I don't think most developers have to go very far with it
however. If they do then they probably shoudn't be using .NET in the first
place.
For good or bad, C#
was invented from the ground up for that environment and it's a natural
fit.
But even now there are some OS facilities that aren't accessible from
managed code.
Agreed as previously noted.
You'ld therefore be better off stripping out most of the native C++ stuff
but
by the time you do that you're mostly left with raw C++ syntax only.
Some companies have millions of lines of tested C/C++ code, they
aren't going to throw that away - ever (until it's of no use to them).
That's a very good point but I seriously doubt a lot of companies are
migrating mega-applications like this. More likely they're trying to
leverage old C++ code in newer .NET apps. In any case it's really by
necessity and not based on technical merit. If you're starting a new
application from scratch then I stick by my original post.
If you think I'm a fan of all this however, understand
that I think C# was a big mistake in the first place and C++ should have
been used from the outset.
An ally to the cause after all :)
I don't like it but the cause is now lost. While I'll be returning to my C++
roots eventually, I believe the language is in permanent decline on Windows.
On the bright side it means more $ down the road for vets like myself (what
are COBOL programmers now making) so do I now qualify as a traitor?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- From: David Lowndes
- Re: Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- References:
- Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- From: Edward Diener
- Re: Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- From: Larry Smith
- Re: Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- From: David Lowndes
- Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- Prev by Date: Re: Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- Next by Date: Re: Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- Previous by thread: Re: Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- Next by thread: Re: Disappointment in VC++ .Net in VS2008
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
