posted by SteveRichter

20 hours ago

Steve, the whole point of C++ is to give you the tools to make such a class.

 

but in practice Tianyu, you end up getting some inscrutable compile errors.

Find the error in this code.  Note the bullshit compile error.

  void Tester2( unique_ptr<std::wstring> pString )  {  }  void CallTester2( )  {    unique_ptr<std::wstring> pString ;    Tester2( pString ) ;  }

 4 IntelliSense: "std::unique_ptr<_Ty, _Dx>::unique_ptr(const std::unique_ptr<_Ty, _Dx>::_Myt &) [with _Ty=std::wstring, _Dx=std::default_delete<std::wstring>]" (declared at line 1447 of "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0\VC\include\memory") is inaccessible c:\SkyDrive\democpp\Tester\Tester.cpp 379 14 Tester
Error 3 error C2248: 'std::unique_ptr<_Ty>::unique_ptr' : cannot access private member declared in class 'std::unique_ptr<_Ty>' c:\skydrive\democpp\tester\tester.cpp 382 1 Tester

posted by SteveRichter

Another C++ request ...  enum class.  Have a built in ToString method or enable enum class to have member functions, or add extension methods to the language.  The purpose being to enable enum specific code, like Parse and ToString, to be called using dot notation from an enum instance.

enum class Colors { red, white, blue } ;
Colors color = Colors::red ;
auto textColorName = color.ToString( )
auto anotherColor = Colors::Parse( textColorName ) ;

Bigger picture. Give me a native version of C#. Or enhance the struct handling capabilites of C#. ( C# cannot efficiently handle PIDLs used by windows shell. ) Microsoft to this day says that windows shell code written in C# is unsupported. A C# like native code language would be awesome.

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

16 minutes ago, STL wrote

but it is awesome at tuples.

neat. thanks!

posted by SteveRichter

1 hour ago, bkuhns wrote

*snip*

Watch Bjarne's presentation from Going Native 2012, "C++11 Style". He shows how strong abstractions can be built using C++11 that are clean and modern.

 

Well, I doubt I will find a satisfactory way to organize my C++ code because I have to code in both .h and .cpp files. I like the way my C# code is organized with each class in a .cs file and those files are in folders organized along namespace lines. I like being able to return Tuples from C# methods and adding extension methods. Granted these are my little tics, but it still makes a lot of sense to me that the native language used by MSFT should be as similar to C# as possible and focused on doing what you need a native language to do - run with low overhead.

posted by SteveRichter

22 hours ago, Charles wrote

*snip*

Really? With C++, you're given very sharp knives to cut through computational complexity. As such, you need to learn how to use them wisely (and effectively). When has this not been the case for C++? Further, C++ is language that affords great efficiency and performance across the hardware spectrum and with high level modern programming abstractions. ...

See, I thought we simply needed a language to write efficient native code. Kind of like C with modern programming constructs like namespaces, classes, interfaces, extension methods, tuples, lambdas, collections, ...  To write large apps I will use C#.  For energy efficient, quick starting standalone apps give me a native language with a familiar syntax.

posted by SteveRichter

2 hours ago, STL wrote

 

> Still do not understand why C++, with all the additions being throw at it, is retaining the #include header file thing.

That's being worked on ("modules") for a future C++ Standard.

I am really not a complainer, but I wish MSFT would just forge ahead and do modules on their own. From my recent experience with C++ it is very difficult to organize your code when you have to split things between .h and .cpp files. Esp when I bring my C# practices to a C++ project. Filters are not a substitute for C# folders.

thanks for the explanations.

posted by SteveRichter

Still do not understand why C++, with all the additions being throw at it, is retaining the #include header file thing. That is the aspect of the language that to me makes it difficult to use and structure your code files.

posted by SteveRichter

1 day ago, Charles wrote

... Thinking about them in the same way is therefore not meaningful. What would a "windows explorer namespace extension" mean in the modern shell?

C

don't know. Does windows 8 have a windows explorer? Does it work the same as the win7 explorer, only written  using WinRT?  A namespace extension enables new nodes to be added to the windows explorer hierarchy tree. Only they are incredibly difficult to write because of very cryptic COM interfaces. And they are historically written with C++, again a real hassle compared to C#. Was hoping that if the 1/2 million windows api's have been replaced with winRTclasses and methods? then windows explorer is easier to work with now.

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

5 hours ago, wkempf wrote

@LarryLarsen: I think you misunderstood me. I didn't say you shouldn't have to uninstall apps. I understand the need for OEMs to install this crapware. However, I shouldn't have to be an expert and spend significant effort to uninstall the apps. Add/remove programs should "just work". Microsoft shouldn't provide the Windows logo for machines that install crapware that can't be easily removed this way.

I agree with this completely.  I was thinking during the broadcast that there sure are important ways that Microsoft could improve Windows. The tip that people reboot after each app is removed could be negated if Windows could better deactivate running applications.

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

posted by SteveRichter

Why no interfaces? Why does WPF and sivlerlight not have javascript? Why is javascript not a .NET language?

posted by SteveRichter