Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue
From: Tim (Tim_at_NoSpam)
Date: 05/17/04
- Next message: Tom Serface: "Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue"
- Previous message: Scott McPhillips [MVP]: "Re: Implementing a Message Handler for WM_IDLEUPDATECMDUI"
- In reply to: Roy Fine: "Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue"
- Next in thread: Tom Serface: "Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue"
- Reply: Tom Serface: "Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue"
- Reply: Joseph M. Newcomer: "Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:32:34 +1200
Hi all,
VC7 is an odd one. They are now giving the compiler away without an IDE. I
have no idea what this means. Does MS want more VC programmers out there?
Does MS want to sway the VC market to 7 with newcomers (no pun intended)?
There are three major parts to this: the IDE, the compiler / linkers (with
support tools) and .Net.
IDE:
I tend to look at this whole .Net thing from a distance: the IDE is
disgusting for VC. For ASP it is good because ASP has improved so
substantially. For VB it is a great improvement - there are tons of new
features in the IDE that VB programmers did not have before.
One unified IDE sensible. VS laid the foundations for this in its
architecture. The VB IDE had meandered along over the years with only one
major improvement - to MDI. Why learn several IDE's when one architecturally
strong IDE is all that is needed?
Compilers:
It is well known that the V7 compilers are stronger in many areas -
particularly VC6 code. The bugs that are most apparent are in the '7'
implementations - attributed programming and the like.
.Net
.Net for ASP is a huge improvement. For VB Programmers it is a new
language - each and every VB progammer has to effectively learn a new
language. For C++ the core language hasn't changed much but...
Looking into .Net from several perspectives gives only 1 major point of
apprehension for me: essentially all the '7' variant languages (IE managed
code) are new languages - VC7 managed code is a totally different language
but thankfully a superset of the existing C++. What standards adherence is
there / will there be and which other compiler vendors are coming to the
party supporting managed code so reinforcing the language changes? Are the
languages changes just a fad?
The positives in the new language (singular I.E. the CLR) is that there are
very substantial extensions to the 'class library'. So many new facilities
are in there that make the programmers life more productive and easier, that
to ignore them is to risk living in the dark ages. The new facilities for
the C++ (or VB or C#) programmer are powerful tools which when compared to
current methods of low level coding make current coding look like plodding
around in assembler - highly unproductive, slow to code, many lines of code
to achieve a task and so a high risk of bugs. Take a look at the ease of
integrating say: Event Logging, Performance Monitor metrics, Services (web
and system), MSI Installer integration, NUnit - JUnit style test
orchistration, very very substantial Security related improvements - and
these are only *my* favourites.
The point I wish to make is to not steer away from .Net because you dislike
the IDE.
Getting back to the original question... Having written a substantial amount
of VC6 code, I too am concerned about the longevity of the product. It is
easy enough in my own experience to 'port' to VC7, but that is not an
answer. The services that VC6 is built upon are more worrying. For example:
ADO and ODBC. It would be near impossible for MS to drop ODBC. ADO has
already been superceeded by ADO.Net - when will support for classic ADO end?
What happens when the new fangled highly secure OS versions come out that
are .Net integrated - will running any non .Net / CLR programs be
non-conformant of security standards or has MS had the foresight of being
able to wrap these systems in safe containers?
I am enormously concerned about MS ability to deliver a supposed Enterprise
class language that will have a support life time sufficient to justify
writing large applications - applications that are legacy by nature. I can
see COBOL people with a smile on their faces. Until I see stability in the
future direction of the IDE I can not see stability in the core language -
as separate as they may be.
- Tim
"Roy Fine" <rlfine@twt.obfuscate.net> wrote in message
news:ecxw7oAPEHA.644@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>
> "Daniel James" <wastebasket@nospam.aaisp.org> wrote in message
> news:VA.000006a9.0278b880@nospam.aaisp.org...
>> In article news:<hgQpc.42313$TT.2629@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, Ian
>> Semmel wrote:
>> > A common IDE is a good idea, but usually in programming, you have
>> > to write code that fits into the user's environment, not tell the
>> > user "I've written this really good program. All you have to do is
>> > change the way you do everything". I can imagine the reaction from
>> > my customers if I tried this.
>> >
>> > I think it would have been easier for MS to develop VS6 into
>> > something better than the path they chose. I think I remember
>> > something about some guru they got from Borland who decided that
>> > the VS7 approach was they way to go.
>>
>> The thing they got wrong was thinking that it would be "real cool" to
>> have the *same* environment for Visual C, Visial Basic, and Visual
>> Whatever, rather than separate environments for each language that
>> would do what made sense for that language.
>
>
> Unfortunately -- the answer is in the numbers -- with a 10:1 (or higher)
> ratio of VB programmers to VC++ programmers, we should feel fortunate that
> there is a VC++7 :)
>
> rlf
>
>
- Next message: Tom Serface: "Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue"
- Previous message: Scott McPhillips [MVP]: "Re: Implementing a Message Handler for WM_IDLEUPDATECMDUI"
- In reply to: Roy Fine: "Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue"
- Next in thread: Tom Serface: "Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue"
- Reply: Tom Serface: "Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue"
- Reply: Joseph M. Newcomer: "Re: Visual C++ 6 support issue"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
