Comments

Andre wrote

> If all Windows developers would be C++ developers
> it would be fairly simple - WinRT would be something
> like QT - but come on - it's not the case

I'm thinking about Gdiplus API, which is pure C++ API in native code:

using namespace Gdiplus;
Bitmap *b = new Bitmap("a.jpg");

and is also part of the .Net framework, can be used in C# or VB:

using System.Drawing
Dim b As New Bitmap("a.jpb")

This is the kind of API what I would have liked for WinRT.

This is not COM ABI.

Impossible because of concurrency/process/thread safety?

Thank you very much for the detailed clarifications. This answers my concerns.

I especially like this paragraph:

>there are real conveniences (cleaner code) and efficiencies
>(performance gains) from using compiler-understood extensions
>like C++/CX, which is why we went to the trouble of baking
>a CComPtr<T> into the language as T^... so my only
>recommendation/request would be that you give each a
>try and then use whichever you like best. Who knows,
>some people who hate extensions might just find after
>trying them side by side that they kinda prefer the
>language extensions after all

Maybe there is an easy way to close this discussion:

Do you MS-guys use these extensions in Windows 8 code?

If yes, then we will certainly have to reconsider our bad 1st impression about C++/CX, and admit we are wrong.

If no, then this C++/CX stuff will certainly join WPF (amongst others) in the trash can very soon.

@Homero

+1

WE DO NOT WANT TO USE THESE EXTENSIONS

We don't need these C#-like extensions to access COM objects in C++. In C++ we always write more code than in C#. C++ programmers want to know what the code do so they can tune it or make it performant, C# programmers don't care.

We don't need delegates, partial classes, generics, or ^ pointers since C++ already knows how to do that. Why would we do it the CX/C# way?

C++ references a COM object with a * pointer or a smart pointer.

Hopefully there seems to be a new WRL C++ template library somewhere. Is there any documentation about it? Can we use it instead of CX?

I almost agree with most posts here.

I've been working for different ISVs for several years on large C++ projects (tax paying software, Image editing, Financial, programming tools...)

One problem with existing C++ apps now is the UI, which is outdated. They share that problem with Delphi apps . You know that battleship gray. I've spent lots of time trying to move (parts of) projects to Winform or WPF. This generally ends up with an awfull mix of C++, C++/CLI and C#. You know what I mean since you guys have ported Visual Studio UI to WPF ! This surely has been a huge amount of work.

If there would have been a modern UI C++ library, thing would have been far simpler. I've heard about DirectUI, and I can't wait to know more about what seems to be a native UI library.

Also I have participated to brand new WPF projects, in C#. For example an image editing app. One year after it started, the project is thrown away (10 men-year). WPF is too heavy, .Net has poor memory management, and the software was not compatible enough with previous versions of this project. Customers don't want a new app, they just want a better app which is able to reuse their old files/data.

What are all the C++ app developpers doing ? They have built their own UI framework and libraries years ago, sometimes based on MFC, or other libraries. (AFAIK MFC is not that bad, it is still used in many C++ apps, it is just old) They try to update the framework over the years. That's not easy, and requires a lot of resources. In the same time they have to update the applications. I bet the Office team at Microsoft has its own C++ framework. You can ask them what to do.

Since I've discovered .Net framework, I wonder why it is not also written in C++ native code. Maybe not the whole framework, but at least some core libraries, a powerfull UI layer, a fast database engine (I sometimes use SQLite in C++ client app)

Well, you know, just ask the guys who have ported Visual Studio to WPF, they will tell you what you need to do

Oh, and an important point: all developers have coding guidelines (or at least they should!). Many C++ ISVs ask their developers to write SIMPLE code. That means, avoid functors, use templates sparingly, etc. Don't use advanced C++ features if you can write simple code. Because simple code contains less bugs, and can easily been maintained. C++ is a powerfull language, and not all C++ developers can handle that power correctly.

I don't expect C++ language improvements, C++ is fine. But please, give us the equivalent of a light .Net framework, written in native code. That would be heaven.

Just wondering if all the features Pat talks about are delivered in vs2010 beta 2 ?

For example, about the taskbar interaction, all I have found is CWinApp::EnableTaskbarInteraction(BOOL bEnable), which actually only sets a BOOL flag... which is not used anuwhere else in the MFC code. Or I am missing something ?

Also, I can't open the class wizard now

Anyway the Ribbon designer is really great ! .NET programmers will really be jalous.

www.blogmfc.com (in French)

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=Internal&a=http%3a%2f%2fwww.blogmfc.com (automatic translation in English)