|
The biggest problem is the security fixes generally do not have anything to do with the GUI and functional bugs that are inrtoduced in each new version of Visual Studio. For those you have to wait for hotfixes or service packs or the next version.
John
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't see a single improvement for c++ users in VS 2008, so I'm not even going to bother with 2010. (and no, I'm not a language puritan so I don't care about c++.oX )
|
|
|
|
|
You don't care about the optimizations done in VC10?
|
|
|
|
|
i'm c++ aimed too but i saw a lot of improvements for us :
- ClassWizzard is back
- better classview
- compiler optimisations
- better debugging abilities
... etc
|
|
|
|
|
> ClassWizzard is back
and it generates code only in MS style?
what about creation of getters, setters, and class rename feature that actually works (current version doesn't)
> better classview
don't use it
> compiler optimisations
ok
> better debugging abilities
what improvements exactly?
|
|
|
|
|
Not into GUI, dont appreciate C++0x, just 'ok' for optimizations, disregard classwizard.
Then what you expect?
Better debugging in terms of 'Parallel Debugging' for instance.
The compiler can compile the code 'inline'
What were you looking into C++ as such?
|
|
|
|
|
VC already does multi-threaded debugging and inline functions.
There's actually quite a lot they could improve if they wanted to, but MS is not interested in c++. Therefore there is no need for me to upgrade.
|
|
|
|
|
I said parallel debugging, not MT debugging.
Can't explain in words. Search online for more information, or try the beta/trail yourself.
And I said 'inline code compilation', just like C# and spell-check in MS Word. It gives wavy line under some syntax error. Like using undefined variable, passing invalid number of arguments etc.
Had MS not interested in C++, they would not have added C++0x new features, the MFC class wizard, code analysis, auto complete for includes, CLI and things like that.
If you are biased, no one can please you.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not biased, it's just that non of that stuff is useful to me.
|
|
|
|
|
So you are just dying for a getter setter in class?
Does that suffice you?
Then, buddy, Visual Studio is powerful enough to support extensions and scripts to do that for you. Utilize it.
|
|
|
|
|
They call it background compilation. Basically, it means that IDE compiles code as you write it. It gives more information for code analysis, so you've got better IntelliSense / code audition.
This feature is also used in JavaScript (though it's called active data or something).
|
|
|
|
|
"Had MS not interested in C++, they would not have added C++0x new features, the MFC class wizard, code analysis, auto complete for includes, CLI and things like that."
MFC isn't C++, its all or nothing approach is irrelevant when there are more flexible ways.
Why does the addition of CLI show that MS is interested in c++?! CLI is .net!!
modified 6-Feb-17 7:48am.
|
|
|
|
|
From an earlier Post of Mine (ca. Feb).
file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Smiller/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.IE5/YHRATLVN/VS2010RCReadme%5B1%5D.htm#Supported%20Operating%20Systems
Contains the following:
2.4.2.3 IntelliSense does not work for C++/CLI
IntelliSense is not available for C++/CLI in this release of Visual Studio. However, all browsing features (ClassView, GotoDef, Find All References, Navigate To, etc) are still available for C++/CLI.
To resolve this issue:
There is no workaround. IntelliSense for C++/CLI is not supported in this release of Visual Studio.
Another not-so-subtle nudge towards 'their' C# .
/xml> "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
| "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
| "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek dissappointment. If you are searching for perfection in yourself, then you seek failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balboos wrote: There is no workaround
The workaround is to buy Visual Assist. 
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
ed welch wrote: and no, I'm not a language puritan so I don't care about c++.oX
What does that mean? C++0x features are useful in real-world scenarios - you can now "move" objects instead of copying them (think returning large objects from functions, or adding them to containers). Also there is nullptr keyword which helps avoid silly overloading bugs when NULL is passed. And additions to the Standard Library? Regex, hash containers, Unicode support? Parallel Patterns Library? Windows 7 support for MFC? See here for more[^].
Of course, you can always say "I don't care for any of that", but it still does not mean there are no improvements.
VC++ 2010 is the first release since VC++ 7.1 I am really excited about. In fact, I may even get ViEmu[^] when it is ready and start using Visual Studio for coding again 
|
|
|
|
|
> C++0x features are useful in real-world scenarios
I would say the opposite. It's used for in exotic cases for people that like playing around with the language. Really, all that stuff just makes my code less portible, because it's likely that the compilor on the other platforms don't support it.
|
|
|
|
|
ed welch wrote: I would say the opposite. It's used for in exotic cases for people that like playing around with the language
What is exotic about avoiding copying a huge object when returned from a function? Or a portable regular expression library? Or support for WIndows 7 controls? Or anything that I mentioned in the post above? All real-world scenarios if I know anything about real world.
ed welch wrote: Really, all that stuff just makes my code less portible, because it's likely that the compilor on the other platforms don't support it.
Gnu gcc supports even more C++0x than VC++2010. If you want to port some Linux code to Windows in a couple of years from now, you'd better have as much C++0x in VC++ as possible, or you'll be in the same situation as C programmers who can't port gcc programs to VC because the later has poor support for C99.
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: What is exotic about avoiding copying a huge object when returned from a function? Or a portable regular expression library? Or support for WIndows 7 controls? Or anything that I mentioned in the post above? All real-world scenarios if I know anything about real world.
That stuff is not c++.ox, which is what I was talking about.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Gnu gcc supports even more C++0x than VC++2010
What version of gcc? Not all platforms have the latest gcc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ed welch wrote: That stuff is not c++.ox
The support for Win7 controls is not C++0x. Move semantics, regexp, hash libraries, etc are.
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: In fact, I may even get ViEmu
Ah, so you're contemplating returning to the IDE dark side Nemanja?
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin McFarlane wrote: Ah, so you're contemplating returning to the IDE dark side Nemanja?
Yep I have heard rumors that the new IDE would be able to track code even without a "solution" (just ike SourceInsight) and debugging is already pretty decent, so the only missing thing is a good code editor.
Of course, it is still way too slow and bloated for my taste, but my employer has provided me with ridiculously powerful dev machines, so I'll swallow that.
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: to track code even without a "solution"
Really! Any more info on that?
I have not been able to install RTM because RC does not uninstall yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote: Really! Any more info on that?
As I said, it is just a rumor I heard. Didn't try it yet.
|
|
|
|
|
FIRST COMMENT FROM YOUR REFERENCE LINK:
Tuesday, April 13, 2010 11:10 AM by jps
# re: Visual Studio 2010 is Now Available
I expected not to have Intellisense for my C++/CLI files (cf. tirade launched against Boris by many)
but... in RTM it seems that Intellisense does not work for ANY C++ file (regardless of /clr setting) IF there is a /clr file used in the project.
This was not the case in the beta I tested and adds insult to injury.
Doh !
/xml> "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
| "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
| "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek dissappointment. If you are searching for perfection in yourself, then you seek failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
