Re: MFC future?

Tech-Archive recommends: Speed Up your PC by fixing your registry

I don't know all of the specifics, but my guess is that there are two
factors that keep C++ from having the "cool" new Visual Studio stuff. The
first is that they are really pushing managed code and C++ programmers are
still somewhat resistent so attempting to move them to a easier syntax is
like a carrot. Secondly, I think C++ is a more difficult syntax. Since
there are standards that must be adhered to (some that aren't yet even) MSFT
doesn't have as much control over the direction of the language. Some of
the "stuff" that C++ does that C# doesn't could make it difficult to
implement all of the libraries and tools that C# and VB have now.

I agree with the @ string thing. You'd think something like that would be a
snap to implement since it's mostly the compiler evaluating the strings.
However, it will no doubt be difficult to get that into C++ unless it
becomes a standard for portability reasons (they seem to relax that idea
when it comes to managed code additions).

Tom

"David Ching" <dc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3MYnf.41485$6e1.1980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> Very true, and I expect C++ is going to become a tour de force in the .NET
> community, especially for migrating legacy apps, as you say. To me, the
> only advantage of C# is the better tools in Visual Studio (like the
> refactoring). But C++ will catch up in time.
>
> Oh, and I wish C++ had something like the @"literal string" in C#. That's
> really the only thing in C# that I've found so far that I truly miss on a
> daily basis in C++. Whereas I continually miss destructors in C# on a
> daily basis, and the lack of default parameters on a weekly basis.


.