Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: "Mihai N." <nmihai_year_2000@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2007 15:41:30 -0700
a while ago I asked how come Microsoft didn't make a switch or some #defineAnd I think it was explained at the time that it would be non-standard
or whatever that made default literal strings be Unicode without any
adornments.
compliant :-)
... and having to refer everyone to the history of it all just makes itAs a platform creator (as MS is) you have two options when things evolve:
more maddening.
- Redesign the whole thing "clean and nice". This takes a lot of resources,
and will break a lot of things developed by 3rd party.
- Patch things to make it work, in the same time keeping compatibility.
There is no need to read the history to use the stuff. But is nice to
read it, so that you can understand why the crap is crap.
Don't you have any code that you wrote 10 years ago that now you would do
differenty? And would it not be nice to be able to explain to somebody
reading your code today and judging you why is so crapy, what where the
restrictions and the reasons at the time?
but I think that .NET has raised the bar in terms of simplicityIf it did not, then there it would be no reason to create it :-)
and straightforwardness
is going to be the new standard by whichThere are already compatibility problems between .NET 1.1 and 2.0
C++ is judged by, and my IMHO, it isn't doing so great right now, and the
attitude of explaining the situation away by referring to history isn't
going to help.
Wait 10-20 years and let's see then how clean .NET will look like :-)
Knowing the history helps me:
- Because I can better accept that something is crap because of
good reasons, than because of stupidity. It does no help me
use the system, true.
- Because it teaches me how to deal with an old legacy system,
if I have to maintain one.
--
Mihai Nita [Microsoft MVP, Windows - SDK]
http://www.mihai-nita.net
------------------------------------------
Replace _year_ with _ to get the real email
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: David Ching
- Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- References:
- Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: Martin
- Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: Mihai N.
- Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: David Ching
- Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: MrAsm
- Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: David Ching
- Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: Mihai N.
- Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: David Ching
- Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: Mihai N.
- Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- From: David Ching
- Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- Prev by Date: Re: LINK : fatal error LNK1104: cannot open file "mfc71.lib"
- Next by Date: Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- Previous by thread: Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- Next by thread: Re: Are _T() and TEXT() macros equivalent?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading