Re: MFC vs .NET
- From: Joseph M. Newcomer <newcomer@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 00:25:05 -0400
I tend to agree. That's why I was questioning the issues of "efficiency".
I recently encountered someone who works with a lot of massive server-based database
retrieval. He was amused to report that the corporate attitude was that computing time is
completely irrelevant. Getting the data INTO the computer is the ONLY parameter of
interest. These are the kind of people who are looking at AMD-based servers with tens of
gigabytes of memory as their low-end servers, and can't get enough RAM into their boxes.
So they don't see languages like Java or C# as having any relevance to their performance,
and preferred the advantages of managed code environments over nominal computing
efficiency gains of native code.
(He and I did a lot of database work 20 years ago, which is why we like the idea of 8TB
address spaces...)
joe
On 18 Aug 2006 18:16:27 -0700, "Ajay Kalra" <ajaykalra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP]I wanted to create a function in c++ that does the time critical task and
call it in a c# app
and with just one call have the task done because many calls to unmanaged
will reduce performance due to marshalling i guess!?
This would not be an issue if you are all managed. Why do you even want
to keep unmanaged c++ in this case?
---
Ajay
email: newcomer@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Web: http://www.flounder.com
MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm
.
- References:
- MFC vs .NET
- From: Leon_Amirreza
- Re: MFC vs .NET
- From: Joseph M . Newcomer
- Re: MFC vs .NET
- From: Leon_Amirreza
- Re: MFC vs .NET
- From: Ajay Kalra
- MFC vs .NET
- Prev by Date: Re: (void **)&x
- Next by Date: Re: PCH playing hell with project copy
- Previous by thread: Re: MFC vs .NET
- Next by thread: Re: MFC vs .NET
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|