|
|
Of course you're not an MFC programmer. 
// "In the end it's a little boy expressing himself." Yanni
while (I_am_alive)
{
cout<<"I love programming.";
}
|
|
|
|
|
What... Mostly Forgotten Code (MFC)???
Yes... I know MFC .. still use it once in a great while...
But by now you should be able to code pretty much all of the MFC stuff blindfolded with one hand... (right?)
What do you need old technology for? Move on...
|
|
|
|
|
M i s t e r L i s t e r wrote: Mostly Forgotten Code (MFC)???
I guess not.
M i s t e r L i s t e r wrote: But by now you should be able to code pretty much all of the MFC stuff blindfolded with one hand... (right?)
Yes, but it's not a good reason to ignore native coders. The fact that native coders are able to use notepad to code and CMD to compile, is not a good reason to remove ClsddWizard from VS. If you mean now in C# most of it can be done by just using mouse, I shall say yes, but I enjoy creating my own custom creature.
M i s t e r L i s t e r wrote: What do you need old technology for?
For maintenance, .net limitations, anywhere speed is more critical than UI (Games, Hardware related stuff like drivers, Scientific softwares with huge calculations,etc), using old classes that has not an equivalent in .net, managers decision, pure fun of it, etc. To me, it's just enjoying MFC and not too much enjoying C# on desktop Apps.
// "In the end it's a little boy expressing himself." Yanni
while (I_am_alive)
{
cout<<"I love programming.";
}
|
|
|
|
|
Ask Cobol programmers how they like maintenance...
(and how they like the job market)
|
|
|
|
|
M i s t e r L i s t e r wrote: Ask Cobol programmers
Ask SAP what they did with outdated Cobol ABAP.
Ask why Vala project started.
However, this is not a way to compare or discuss, I guess.
C# is managed. It cannot and should not be compared to C++ (MFC is another story. It's just a framework not a language.), I believe.
The world still needs native code in many industries for several reasons. Now what is Microsoft offering for native coding better than C++? Again, I believe that MFC is still one of the best frameworks in Windows over C++.
Now no longer support MFC and help frameworks like QT to grow, why? because there's a need to native code that should be satisfied somehow.
// "In the end it's a little boy expressing himself." Yanni
while (I_am_alive)
{
cout<<"I love programming.";
}
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, there is still a need for native code. The other man's protest seems to be an emotional attachment to his tools or using something new. We must remember that all of these things are merely tools, and every tool has its intended purpose. If we keep ourselves from trying to use a particular tool in every circumstance, then both C#/.NET and C++/MFC can happily coexist in the IT world.
With this in mind, I'm always looking for new tools to do new things. I am currently exploring functional programming, starting with Haskel then maybe F#, for its ability to express things as relationships and potentially easy parallelization. Just another tool. If I'm doing mathematical relationships, maybe Haskel. Expressing logic, maybe PROLOG or MERCURY. Prototyping GUI's, Visual Basic 6. Web services: J2EE, .NET, or Rails. Need to do anything: Common LISP. While this may be controversial, I've found that people who use many different tools and styles have an easier time solving complex problems, as they don't look at them in just one way (limited by their tool or language of choice).
|
|
|
|
|
NimitySSJ wrote: easy parallelization
Wow! tempting. 
NimitySSJ wrote: people who use many different tools and styles have an easier time solving complex problems, as they don't look at them in just one way (limited by their tool or language of choice)
That's right but hard at the same time. Just invaluable experience during years of programming makes it possible I think. Not everyone can do it.
// "In the end it's a little boy expressing himself." Yanni
while (I_am_alive)
{
cout<<"I love programming.";
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Just imagine if Vista was wholly written in C# with not a native code DLL or application in the bunch...." (El Corazon)
You shouldn't speak of such things! I just imagined an OS (Cosmos 7.0, maybe) running in C#/.NET. I hope you are going to cover the bill my heart doctor sent me for what resulted.
|
|
|
|
|
NimitySSJ wrote: I hope you are going to cover the bill my heart doctor sent me for what resulted.
uh uh uh uh.... well... uhmm.... I work for MS, yeah, that's the ticket.... call me at MS... my name is... uh... bill gates, yeah, that's the ticket... bill gates!
_________________________
Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau.
Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
|
|
|
|
|
El Corazon wrote: Just imagine if Vista was wholly written in C# with not a native code DLL or application in the bunch....
W00t, just can't wait for that reboot time when the GAC got corrupted and Windows had to re-JIT itself before it finished loading.
|
|
|
|
|
Hamed Mosavi wrote: anywhere speed is more critical than UI (Games, Hardware related stuff like drivers, Scientific softwares with huge calculations,etc)
This is a very big reason why I use MFC 95% of the time. I develop scientific applications for medical imaging research that are very resource hungry. With the help of a 4 drive SATA hardware raid 5 my latest app loads > 1 GB of 3D image data to memory in less than 10 seconds. The second is that I have written 500K lines of MFC code.
John
|
|
|
|
|
M i s t e r L i s t e r wrote: What do you need old technology for? Move on...
You say it is old. I say it enables me to write high performance code. But then it would make sense to you only if you know what I'm talking about...
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero
.·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·.
Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed. The 15-30 second startup time required for .NET applications is sufficient indictment alone.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
You know this is a myth right?
This can only be slightly true if you're talking about very old and with very few resources.
C++ isn't dead, it should be used mostly for top notch I/O processes... massive stuff like heavy loaded ETL, or direct hardware connections...
If you port C++ to the C# world you'll have problems like trying to use C# in the C++ world.
Despite you can do both you'll have great drawbacks on both scenarios.
C# mostly on speed, and C++ on development process time (cost).
For me this Speed vs. Dev. Time is the thing that must be evaluated when deciding between these languages. We can't be blind on either side like almost everyone is like "Mine is better, yours is junk".
Don't forget that the objective is to sell a product and make the customer happy with it. Most customers don't care if it's C or C# or C$ or SQL or Access... they want it to work, well, fast and cheap as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not a myth. Every .NET application I've ever used had an abysmally long startup time. Even "Hello world!" takes forever to start.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Absoutely correct! Using the *new* and *improved* .Net-based SQL Management Studio is painfully sluggish compared to the *legacy* SQL2K Enterprise Manager and Query Analyzer. I wish they would bring back the native code versions of these tools. 
onwards and upwards...
|
|
|
|
|
This is bad part of the IL...
As you should know, .net isn't compiled.
If you don't want to take advantage of that (like reflection for example) you can compile it directly to native code using ngen.exe
It will perform faster at first start.
|
|
|
|
|
Gary, I think you're wasting time arguing with someone who don't know what he's talking about. When he says C++ is dead, you could know what is all that he knows. May be someone should tell him that all the device drivers, all the high-performance graphic programs, all the high-performance games, all the high-performance embedded programs, linux, windows, etc., are written on C and C++. I would say he shares his IQ with sea cucumbers.
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero
.·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·.
Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: I would say he shares his IQ with sea cucumbers.
Gentlemen, No fighting in the war room! The Sea Cucumbers are innocent. Leave them out of this.
codito ergo sum
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Wheeler wrote: It's not a myth. Every .NET application I've ever used had an abysmally long startup time. Even "Hello world!" takes forever to start.
Bah! It's your expectations that are the issue here; don't go and blame .NET because you're one of those types that think software shouldn't be slow. 
|
|
|
|
|
<humble><eyes_downcast>
I'm sorry, sir. I'll drink the Kool-Aid™ this time.
</eyes_downcast></humble>
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCode wrote: and C++ on development process time (cost).
not necessarily, this too is a myth. Much of what you can do in C#, you can also do in C++ in equivalent development speed. The difference is that MS has shifted focus, though they are shifting back. MFC was pushed out in favor of C# and dot net, leaving Qt and others in the real-time rapid C++ UI (even a product called "Ultimate" which based on C++ outperforms UI development under C# and Qt). Basically there is choice, and it is not "old technology" either with new capabilities having existed in Boost in preparation for the latest version of C++, and that latest version coming out later this year or early next, with some capabilities even C# dreams of, MS is considering bringing back MFC in a newer generation capable of accessing the latest, and greatest C++.
There are a lot of myths abounding, C++ never died, and C# is only faster in some areas, and even there, it depends on whos product for C++ you are comparing to.
_________________________
Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau.
Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
