|
 this is being a good chat pal... :p
El Corazon wrote: C++, they are simply ignored by everyone in the C# world.
Almost everyone I know, specially that works for me or with me that have a C++ background prefers to code in C# than in C++.
Same thing about job offers.
For outsourcing's it's way more easy to find .net (managed) projects to work on that either managed or unmanaged C++ projects. This is a fact and we must live with it.
Unless you run a closed environment like a baking system or such, that you can choose whatever you want has the base technology you have to go with the flow... It's not a matter of what's best... it's a matter of what makes the final result easy on the overall aspects of the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCode wrote: Almost everyone I know, specially that works for me or with me that have a C++ background prefers to code in C# than in C++.
almost everyone I know who programmed in (past tense) C++ and moved to C# has absolutely no knowledge of advances in C++ since they moved to C#, so are usually comparing C# now (as it has advanced through several generations also) which they have followed with C++ they "knew" (past tense) and therefore are not making a valid comparison. True they made the choice, and they are still making the comparison that they are familiar with, but that does not necessarily mean they know enough about C++ (now) following '99 and '03 and the new '08/'09 changes to make a valid comparison, let alone a comparison to 3rd party support (free or otherwise) that benefit the comparison. Therefore it may be true that it is in fact easier for them to program in C#, but that does not in any way reflect that C++ is more difficult than C#, simply that they have left the C++ business and now know more about C#.
both languages are good, and I do use both, regularly now. There are valid distinctions in intent between the two language, and it is pretty obvious why C++ is still around and moving forward in technology based on the differing intent of the two.
AlexCode wrote: It's not a matter of what's best... it's a matter of what makes the final result easy on the overall aspects of the problem.
which is exactly the problem. Too many programmers, and salesmen have sold .Net and C# as a complete replacement of C++ on all fronts. This is a disservice to business in general. And it is pretty obvious why development in general has suffered since. You cannot fit a square peg in a round whole without a lot of knife work and even then the fit will always look forced. And that is a fact that we are in fact living with now.
_________________________
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: Too many programmers, and salesmen have sold .Net and C# as a complete replacement of C++ on all fronts.
I don't know any forced replacement in person, but I believe they have occurred.
Whet I think it happened in most cases was that when old systems were to be updated, many had to be completely replaced for several reasons, not all related to technology but also to enterprise business logic changes.
So, a salesman who has more .net resources than C++ resources available sells what it's company have to offer.
This is no competition between C++ and C#... it's marketing!
Most upgrades were also made from Windows Apps to Web Apps, and ASP.net with C# is a very good option.
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCode wrote: For outsourcing's it's way more easy to find .net (managed) projects to work on that either managed or unmanaged C++ projects. This is a fact and we must live with it.
That is true as well. At my previous job, the only programming positions in the U.S. were for C++ development. All .NET work was performed in India and Ireland.
|
|
|
|
|
Why .net outsourcing?
Simply because it's cheap and delivers exactly what it's expected, nothing more or less...
That's the Microsoft flag when "selling" the C# language.
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCode wrote: They overlap in most cases
They don't. C# is an "enterprise" language and overlaps with languages like Java and VB. C++ is a system language and overlaps with C and Ada. If you have switched from C++ to C# and are happy with it, chances are you were using C++ for a wrong purpose in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
So... you end up agreeing with me that these are separated languages with its main usage on different scenarios, none of them with any reason to extinction.
I keep thinking that they overlap tho.
There are many things you can do on both languages... in fact most things.
Considering benchmarks, you find that C++ is more performant on I/O operations, so you should use it on heavy loaded I/O systems like ETL for example.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: you were using C++ for a wrong purpose in the first place
I don't think so... I just don't use it for everything like I understand you are trying to state.
And with the evolution of the languages and computers I keep needing it less.
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCode wrote: you take longer to develop the same thing in C++ than in C#.
no, I can develop a C++ GUI with database query in a fraction of the code and time using Ultimate++ in C++, it only depends on what you believe. YOU believe what you have heard, and refuse to believe anything else, therefore it is true as long as you never accept anything other than what you already believe. The tools are out there to do a lot of things in C++ that C# can do, the only thing C++ doesn't do well is compile on the fly and interpreted language slowdowns. But then some C++ programmers can do that, but then some C# programmers can too.
There really are a lot of myths around from those who want C# to disappear, and those who want C++ to disappear. I don't consider either going to do so. C++ has a purpose and that purpose is different than that of C#, the two languages overlap enough that it seems one could have been a replacement of the other, but I do not believe so. You will always have instances of native EXE/DLL use, even if only for the benefit of providing a native DLL for C# to use to speed it up, you have access to hardware levels and speed that exceeds C# in capability. C++0x is also offering a few things that only C# and a few other languages had, though boost had some of the abilities, C++0x will make it part of the standard. C# and C++ are still growing. C# took a portion of the C++ market for specific tasks for which it was specifically designed, and in that it shines. but that does not necessarily mean that all the myths about C# or C++ are true.
_________________________
Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau.
Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, thanks for Ultimate++: hadn't heard of it before, and those code comparisons show promise for its claim of RAD. So far, I've had to separate logic and presentation, so I can prototype GUI's in an app that's good at it, then use a tool to generate equivalent source code for it in another framework, like wxWidgets, which has excellent features and portability. Now, perhaps, I can just use one tool for all the work. Thanks, again!
|
|
|
|
|
NimitySSJ wrote: Thanks, again!
there are a few bugs I found, though they can be fixed by doing some better code (in other words poor but legal code can crash, better designed code and designed the way they prefer it to be designed works good -- its an "all possible error control areas have not been covered type thing".
and I use it for GNU, and several MS compilers and even same code between them.
_________________________
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: C++ has a purpose and that purpose is different than that of C#, the two languages overlap enough that it seems one could have been a replacement of the other, but I do not believe so.
Well said! Personally, I think C# is a fine replacement for classic VB, but you'll have to pry my C/C++ compiler away from my cold dead body before I let it go. 
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: but you'll have to pry my C/C++ compiler away from my cold dead body before I let it go.
they will have to pull all 10 of them from mine... on about 4 operating systems! 
_________________________
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: they will have to pull all 10 of them from mine...
|
|
|
|
|
i really like 2008, but i still miss the block selection mode we had in VS 6.0
|
|
|
|
|
VS2008 supports block selection. Position the cursor at the start of the block, hold down the Alt key, perform the selection with shift/control as usual.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
thnx ^^
|
|
|
|
|
One of the great benefits of MS and Windows - a standard, consistent user interface. 
Gary
|
|
|
|
|
Huh? I wasn't aware there was a 'standard' Windows keyboard method for performing block selection.
You can't use the same method as normal text selection, since it treats text as a single-dimensional stream. Block selection treats text as a two-dimensional block of characters. Adding the 'Alt' key to the normal sequence seems reasonable and intuitive to me.
Or are you arguing it shouldn't support block selection?
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
ClearSense wrote: i really like 2008, but i still miss the block selection mode we had in VS 6.0
My argument is both the "consistent" and the "standard" user interface. ClearSense suggested it disappeared; you qualified by telling him how to do it. Did ClearSense have a brain fart and forget how to do it because he loaded a new version of VS? Doubt it.
If its implemented and works, doesn't that become the "standard", at least for that program?  Whether it is a "Windows" standard or a VS standard, it is still the standard.
Too many times the UI is changed and learned things have to be unlearned and relearned, yet MS touts it's consistent Windows UI as a benefit to using and developing for Windows. Vista is a great example of what BS this claim is. All user documentation needs changed - "click on File, then..." Oops, no "File" on the menu. "We changed Explorer to be consistent with Vista." And Vista was changed because...?
Windows CE to Pocket PC - totally changed the UI, causing documentation and code rewrites with no added benefit to our customers.
Gary Wheeler wrote: are you arguing it shouldn't support block selection?
No way. The real argument is "why is it (along with copy, paste, insert, delete, format of blocks) is not a Windows standard?".
Go back to the 80's with WordStar, still the champ of word processors. ^KB, ^KK, ^KN to mark a block of COLUMNS, i.e. position 5-21 for 7 rows - 2-dimensional. I don't know if Word can even do that 20+ years later. ALL VERSIONS of WordStar worked the same way. And it could be 10 minutes between the ^KB, ^KK, and ^KN operations - didn't matter. Windows "standard" is do something else while selecting (bump a wrong key) and it forgets the selection and the process must start again.
Of course, now that I know there is the Alt block select capability, I'll have to try it in other MS products. Thanks.
Gary
|
|
|
|
|
2008 Is the slowest there is!!!
2003 is great and 9 express really rocks
But VIM IS THA SHI*
|
|
|
|
|
Try ViEmu on top of VS2005 -- very slick indeed
--Greg
|
|
|
|
|
Has anyone else noticed that the incremental linker frequently crashes in VC++ 2008?
The resulting extra time messing around with multiple projects does kind of put a damper on the whole thing!
modified on Monday, February 04, 2008 5:48:09 AM
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you, although I no longer use MFC or code in C/C++. From what I gather, older versions of the IDE are preferred for MFC development.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
