Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: "David Ching" <dc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:08:16 GMT
"Tom Serface" <tom.nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9603D9FB-B3A2-4E9F-8FAB-D4BD756F3178@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Yeah, that makes sense to me. I guess my point is that there is no
"standard". There are only lots of ways to do the same thing and,
fortunately, the compiler gives us the opportunity to do it our way ...
True, there are no standards, but I guess you could call them "commonly
accepted practices" so when the IDE makes it easy to follow those and hard
or impossible to do anything else, well... that could be a good thing.
Indenting one space past the brace? No... I usually use the tab key and
just set the tabs to whatever I want (could be one space). That way
someone else who wants 4 spaces per tab can set their own value as well.
I thought that was how it was supposed to work.
That's the way I was taught also, but I know programmers who do a
search/replace of '\t' and replace it with " " (four spaces) the first
thing they do. It is also true that if you have tabs only, it makes it
harder to custom-align a second line underneath the first one, for example,
if you want to call a function and put each parameter on a separate line, it
is helpful to be able to start the new parameters at an arbitrary column so
they exactly align with the one preceding it). I guess code like this won't
look very good if you change the number of spaces per tab, but oh well.
You're right about using the debugger. Also I've found Intellisense to be
very useful jumping to the definitions of functions and even just
displaying the prototype and any information written into the .h file near
the prototype. When I think back to the "old days" the IDE we have now is
so far superior that it's almost like rocket science. I'm all for
improving it, but I'm not going back to 6.0 :o)
Yeah, when people talk about the "good old 6.0" I think mainly they are
talking about ClassWizard, and they put on blinders regarding the numerous
small (and not-so-small) improvements in the later IDE's.
The same holds true with Vista vs. XP. Like VS.NET, there are gratuitous
and unneeded changes from the previous version, but also improvements at
every turn, so overall you miss out if you keep running XP (if your PC can
run Vista at suitable speed, of course). Regarding the speed, I keep
wondering why the people complaining about Vista's speed don't go back to
running Windows 3.1, since that was so fast compared to Win95 and anything
after it, there's really no comparison. ;)
Cheers,
David
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: Joseph M . Newcomer
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- References:
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: Joseph M . Newcomer
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: David Ching
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: Joseph M . Newcomer
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: David Ching
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: Joseph M . Newcomer
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: David Ching
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: Joseph M . Newcomer
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: David Ching
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: Joseph M . Newcomer
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: David Ching
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: Joseph M . Newcomer
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: David Ching
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: Tom Serface
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: David Ching
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- From: Tom Serface
- Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- Prev by Date: Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- Next by Date: Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- Previous by thread: Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- Next by thread: Re: AfxGetApp() returns NULL
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading