Pat Brenner: New Updates to MFC in Visual Studio 2008

Just has we are thinking of moving our MFC app to C#

Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.

The only + point for C++ is that it compiles into machine code directly, and if we can get C# to do that, then there is no need for a language like C++.

I was wondering why C++ still exists when C# is that good of a language.


MS, why not retire C++, and just focus on C# and Vb.NET and F#?

Expand C# capabilities, and get rid of P/invoke and replace it with a new kind of mechanism to call dlls outside the .NET framework.

Finally, make the .NET framework really .NET, in the sense that it is distributed in terms of processing power, by enabling sharing. So that my application could use the processor that is Idle in a second room in the the house, automatically through the use of Remoting in LAN.

Kill C++, and lets all be on one page, with C#.

Its confusing many people, and things needs to be simpler, with few languages. C# for experts, VB.NET for beginners and intermediates.

That is all.

PS: some might say, there are programmers outthere who enjoy dealing with buffer overflows, and the pains of C++, and to them I say stick with Visual Studio 6 C++ IDE. and that is that.

SecretSoftware wrote:

Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.

I'm hoping I just missed the sarcasm in that comment. 

Even if we assume, as you seem to, that C++ is an obsolete and uselss language then there are still billions of lines of C++ code out there that work and do the job they were designed, and purchased, to do.  There is absolutely no chance that all of that investmen is just going to vanish any time in the next several decades.  C++ will be with us through the remainder of any of our careers and well beyond.

Since someone will be maintaining C++ code for the next 3 decades at least, Microsoft has, wisely, decided to make more money by selling modern tools to those developers.

PS: I still find C++ to be pretty useful in some circumstance.  I'm just ingroning that for this post.

SecretSoftware wrote:

Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.

The only + point for C++ is that it compiles into machine code directly, and if we can get C# to do that, then there is no need for a language like C++.

I was wondering why C++ still exists when C# is that good of a language.


MS, why not retire C++, and just focus on C# and Vb.NET and F#?

Expand C# capabilities, and get rid of P/invoke and replace it with a new kind of mechanism to call dlls outside the .NET framework.

Finally, make the .NET framework really .NET, in the sense that it is distributed in terms of processing power, by enabling sharing. So that my application could use the processor that is Idle in a second room in the the house, automatically through the use of Remoting in LAN.

Kill C++, and lets all be on one page, with C#.

Its confusing many people, and things needs to be simpler, with few languages. C# for experts, VB.NET for beginners and intermediates.

That is all.

PS: some might say, there are programmers outthere who enjoy dealing with buffer overflows, and the pains of C++, and to them I say stick with Visual Studio 6 C++ IDE. and that is that.

Wow.  Just wow.  You are aware that C++ is the language that many (if not all) games are written in, yes?  I would hazard to guess that Halo is written in it, along with pretty much any other resource intensive/high frames per second game.  MS doesn't have the power to "kill C++" as you put it, much less to they "maintain" it.  Your post is mindnumbingly naive and frankly embarrassing to read.

SecretSoftware wrote: Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.

Because your operating system is built using it.

SecretSoftware wrote:

Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.

The only + point for C++ is that it compiles into machine code directly, and if we can get C# to do that, then there is no need for a language like C++.

I was wondering why C++ still exists when C# is that good of a language.


MS, why not retire C++, and just focus on C# and Vb.NET and F#?

Expand C# capabilities, and get rid of P/invoke and replace it with a new kind of mechanism to call dlls outside the .NET framework.

Finally, make the .NET framework really .NET, in the sense that it is distributed in terms of processing power, by enabling sharing. So that my application could use the processor that is Idle in a second room in the the house, automatically through the use of Remoting in LAN.

Kill C++, and lets all be on one page, with C#.

Its confusing many people, and things needs to be simpler, with few languages. C# for experts, VB.NET for beginners and intermediates.

That is all.

PS: some might say, there are programmers outthere who enjoy dealing with buffer overflows, and the pains of C++, and to them I say stick with Visual Studio 6 C++ IDE. and that is that.

WOW....

please do some resarch in to the topic.


like C and C++ are ANSI standards for a start, not owned by Microsoft or any other company.

and MSFT has provided new C Runtime libraries to help with buffer and memory problems.

and so on...

Hmm, I really would have liked to see the stuff shown in this video to be part of WinForms 3.5.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the improvements for C++ programmers, but it further complicates the MS UI technology landscape.

To achieve Office 2007 look & feel in managed code, you have to rely on 3rd party WinForms controls. WPF is the way to go in the future, but currently lacks a variety of controls we got used to in WinForms.

So it boils down to the problem that the managed UI world is in a transitioning phase between (old) WinForms 2.0 and (new) WPF, and in between is a large gap that ironically C++/MFC seems to fill perfectly (although only conceptually, since the technology is not usable from managed code).

John Melville, MD wrote:



SecretSoftware wrote: Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.

I'm hoping I just missed the sarcasm in that comment. 

Even if we assume, as you seem to, that C++ is an obsolete and uselss language then there are still billions of lines of C++ code out there that work and do the job they were designed, and purchased, to do.  There is absolutely no chance that all of that investmen is just going to vanish any time in the next several decades.  C++ will be with us through the remainder of any of our careers and well beyond.

Since someone will be maintaining C++ code for the next 3 decades at least, Microsoft has, wisely, decided to make more money by selling modern tools to those developers.

PS: I still find C++ to be pretty useful in some circumstance.  I'm just ingroning that for this post.

Let these people use VS 6 , it has C++ 6 and its good for them.

I Yearn for the day when Visual Studio will not have C++ in it anymore.


OSes will be using managed code in the future.

Games too.

So lets just slowly get rid of C++ and focus on C#.

C# is the future, and C++ brings back bad memories , of sleepless nights.

Customers who still use C++ should upgrade to C#. And that is that.

Any one who likes C++ should just stay with VS 6. or previous builds of vs.

figuerres wrote:



SecretSoftware wrote: Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET. The only + point for C++ is that it compiles into machine code directly, and if we can get C# to do that, then there is no need for a language like C++. I was wondering why C++ still exists when C# is that good of a language. MS, why not retire C++, and just focus on C# and Vb.NET and F#? Expand C# capabilities, and get rid of P/invoke and replace it with a new kind of mechanism to call dlls outside the .NET framework. Finally, make the .NET framework really .NET, in the sense that it is distributed in terms of processing power, by enabling sharing. So that my application could use the processor that is Idle in a second room in the the house, automatically through the use of Remoting in LAN. Kill C++, and lets all be on one page, with C#. Its confusing many people, and things needs to be simpler, with few languages. C# for experts, VB.NET for beginners and intermediates. That is all. PS: some might say, there are programmers outthere who enjoy dealing with buffer overflows, and the pains of C++, and to them I say stick with Visual Studio 6 C++ IDE. and that is that.

WOW....

please do some resarch in to the topic.


like C and C++ are ANSI standards for a start, not owned by Microsoft or any other company.

and MSFT has provided new C Runtime libraries to help with buffer and memory problems.

and so on...

they can stop supporting it in future VS builds.

SecretSoftware wrote:



figuerres wrote:  SecretSoftware wrote: Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET. The only + point for C++ is that it compiles into machine code directly, and if we can get C# to do that, then there is no need for a language like C++. I was wondering why C++ still exists when C# is that good of a language. MS, why not retire C++, and just focus on C# and Vb.NET and F#? Expand C# capabilities, and get rid of P/invoke and replace it with a new kind of mechanism to call dlls outside the .NET framework. Finally, make the .NET framework really .NET, in the sense that it is distributed in terms of processing power, by enabling sharing. So that my application could use the processor that is Idle in a second room in the the house, automatically through the use of Remoting in LAN. Kill C++, and lets all be on one page, with C#. Its confusing many people, and things needs to be simpler, with few languages. C# for experts, VB.NET for beginners and intermediates. That is all. PS: some might say, there are programmers outthere who enjoy dealing with buffer overflows, and the pains of C++, and to them I say stick with Visual Studio 6 C++ IDE. and that is that. WOW.... please do some resarch in to the topic. like C and C++ are ANSI standards for a start, not owned by Microsoft or any other company. and MSFT has provided new C Runtime libraries to help with buffer and memory problems. and so on...

they can stop supporting it in future VS builds.

you just do not get it... you don't seem to want to.... so just drop it.

It might be worth pointing out that C# itself is written in C++. Search for "rotor project" if you want to see for yourself. (Sorry continue this sad thread but it had to be said.)

SecretSoftware wrote:

Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.

Try writing a device driver some time, or say, a video game. 

Yes, us C++ devs should just shut up and get to the back of the bus (and keep using VC6, who needs updates!  I mean, improving standards compliance and new features are so confusing to us poor old C++ developers.  We're dinosaurs, I swear, if it wasn't for C++ I'd still be doing COBOL...)

SecretSoftware wrote:

Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.

The only + point for C++ is that it compiles into machine code directly, and if we can get C# to do that, then there is no need for a language like C++.

I was wondering why C++ still exists when C# is that good of a language.


MS, why not retire C++, and just focus on C# and Vb.NET and F#?

Expand C# capabilities, and get rid of P/invoke and replace it with a new kind of mechanism to call dlls outside the .NET framework.

Finally, make the .NET framework really .NET, in the sense that it is distributed in terms of processing power, by enabling sharing. So that my application could use the processor that is Idle in a second room in the the house, automatically through the use of Remoting in LAN.

Kill C++, and lets all be on one page, with C#.

Its confusing many people, and things needs to be simpler, with few languages. C# for experts, VB.NET for beginners and intermediates.

That is all.

PS: some might say, there are programmers outthere who enjoy dealing with buffer overflows, and the pains of C++, and to them I say stick with Visual Studio 6 C++ IDE. and that is that.

This post is wrong on so many levels that it has to be a joke.

Great video!  It's nice to see MFC get some love.

Why are you even responding to SecretSoftware's comment...

Anyways, it is kind of sad that these controls are quite a bit richer than what we get in the WPF world

Thanks for the vid.

There are lots of non-MFC C/C++ applications (plain Win32 code, lightweight C++ API wrappers, etc.) that are in a need for these types of advanced UI controls. Do you have any plans to release a "native" Win32 or MFC independent version of these new controls?

SecretSoftware wrote:

Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.
The only + point for C++ is that it compiles into machine code directly, and if we can get C# to do that, then there is no need for a language like C++.

I was wondering why C++ still exists when C# is that good of a language.

MS, why not retire C++, and just focus on C# and Vb.NET and F#?

Probably because people want fast applications without all the overhead of managed code...

It would be nice to get some of these goodies in WinForms. How strange is that? It has been around 15 years since there was a feature set in MFC that looked sexy. And, that was the 1.0 release.

after watching this video i have to post again and say thanks. i think getting mfc up to shape again in order to enable c++ developers produce applications that users actually enjoy using is extremely important.
more important to me is that i get this functionality out of the box when using mfc. using mfc together with third party mfc extensions in order to make mfc look good is not the way it should be. congratuations on solving that issue in such a magnificent way.

when i saw this video i immediately enjoyed looking at some plain c++ mfc code after years of dealing with the qt way of creating windows, toolbars etc.

if we got nice SOAP compliant client / server functionality in mfc i'm completely happy for a while ...

mwirth wrote:



SecretSoftware wrote: Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.

Because your operating system is built using it.

Let's not forget that Microsoft Office is written in C++. And lets see... that little program, you may have used it, called Visual Studio has quite a bit of C++ code still in it.

I like the improvements that have been done to MFC.

What really would be cool for us, developers, is to make the library available under an open/shared source license for all VC developers.

I am currently working with the open WTL library and I believe that it really makes a difference from a developers point of view if you have the source code of the libraries available that you are using all the time. It makes debugging, understanding (and possibly extending) the library easier and more efficient.

Viktor Krammer

What does it means "ribbon support" and "not wrapping windows controls"? Is it "for MFC developers only"? Or it will be part of FW3.5?

Some words from the realm of obviousness.

The world is in constant flux. People will flow towards the languages with the fewest compromises. The languages that have the most powerful abstractions, are the easiest to learn, the easiest to use, compile to the fastest code on current hardware and help the most with debugging (compile time, or runtime.)

C# isn't the final language, and can't be evolved into it a hundred years from now - unless you forget about backwards compatibility and you don't - that's the only reason not to invent a new and better language from scratch. CIL is not the final IM and the same evolvability constraints probably goes for it as well. Same with the CLR, etc.

I've always felt that the languages of the future will melt with IDE's. In a sense a DSL with a visual abstraction constitutes this melting and blurring of distinctions, just as functional languages blur the distinction between function and value. The real sign of this blurring of lines will be when languages are expressed in graph metaformats (the idea of XML, but more general), allowing flexible program visualizations and transformations.

Maybe just a dream.

An interesting detail not covered in the video:

BCGSoft Co Ltd today announced that Microsoft Corporation has integrated our BCGControlBar Professional Edition technology in the next version of the Microsoft Foundation Classes (MFC) library.

The significant parts of the BCGControlBar Pro classes -- such as visual managers, docking panes, fully-customizable toolbars/menus and Office 2007-style ribbon bars -- were merged with existing MFC classes to enable developers to create a modern, up-to-date user interface with just a few lines of code.

-- http://www.bcgsoft.com/pressreleases/PR071110.pdf

DCMonkey: The BCGSoft angle is discussed in the length thread on this topic on the VC++ team blog.

In short, partnering with BCGSoft to deliver this functionality dramatically reduces our time to market and frees up time for the VC++ libraries team to also invest in several other cool projects in the VS10 timeframe.

Thanks!

Steve Teixeira
Group Program Manager, VC++

For those not planning to move to VS08 anytime soon, how can we have access to these cool libraries?

Would be nice to c the lib. or a small version of them out there!!!

shortcutz wrote:



For those not planning to move to VS08 anytime soon, how can we have access to these cool libraries?

Would be nice to c the lib. or a small version of them out there!!!

Our plan is to provide this new version of MFC for VS2008 and higher.  If you're unable to upgrade and need support for VS2005 or lower, you might consider licensing BCGSoft's libraries.

Hope that helps,

Steve Teixeira, Group Program Manager, VC++

shortcutz wrote:

For those not planning to move to VS08 anytime soon, how can we have access to these cool libraries? Would be nice to c the lib. or a small version of them out there!

Cool libraries?

You won't loose something usefull; BCG libs aren't the best ones. Although I'm happy with Microsoft's desision to bring MFC back to life, I wonder who had that "brilliant" idea to bundle the specific toolset with MFC...

Well you've gone and done it now Pat ! :O

Im going to have to go to my white board and figure out what my next new project using MFC as my UI base is going to be !

Great vid Charles... Can we get more ?  Maybe with Pat and Ali together ?

SecretSoftware wrote:

Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET.

This can only come from an Java-like ignorant.

Have you ever tried to program in C++? Oh, probably yes, and you must have failed miserably. So, lets ban everything we don't understand or can't deal with.

You're pathetic!

SecretSoftware: I highly appreciate your choice of avatar, it perfectly matches your qualities.

SecretSoftware wrote:


I Yearn for the day when Visual Studio will not have C++ in it anymore.

The Visual Studio on this machine doesn't have C++ on it because I decided not to install it when I installed VS 2008. (My VS2005 has C++ on it).

SecretSoftware wrote:


OSes will be using managed code in the future.

Way to show how little you know about OSes.

SecretSoftware wrote:


Games too.

And games.

SecretSoftware wrote:


So lets just slowly get rid of C++ and focus on C#.

C++ will stop being used when it is no longer useful. There is no single group that can force people to stop using C++, and it still remains the language of choice for most big applications. I might venture to point out that Vista, MS Office, Visual Studio and IE/Firefox are all written in C/C++, so it's a long time off a "big switch" to .NET languages.

SecretSoftware wrote:


C# is the future, and C++ brings back bad memories , of sleepless nights.

Anyone for year of the C# desktop?

SecretSoftware wrote:


Customers who still use C++ should upgrade to C#. And that is that.

Anyone who still uses C++ or C# should upgrade to Lisp/Perl and that is that. What gives you the right to overrule what someone else has deemed a good language for your product when you clearly know less about their product than you do.

SecretSoftware wrote:


Any one who likes C++ should just stay with VS 6. or previous builds of vs.

And while they're at it, Steve Ballmer should state that Microsoft Office is now going to support documents written only in capitals because it gets the point across, and that IE8 will drop support for CSS and images because they "arn't useful". Seriously, stop being stupid.

The whole point of .NET is choosing the language of your choice.  I use C++ as little as possible, but I don't want them taking away C#, or VB.NET.  I'm sure the C++ guys feel the same.

Boomport wrote:

The whole point of .NET is choosing the language of your choice.  I use C++ as little as possible, but I don't want them taking away C#, or VB.NET.  I'm sure the C++ guys feel the same.

C# and C++ should like together, like man(aged) and wife (I'll get lynched by politically-correct people if I said native wife).

There are things which C# can do which C++ struggles with. C# puts code to product quickly and well, it has an awesome IDE and it's easy to reason about automatically.

There are things which C++ can do which C# struggles with. C++ uses vast, vast libraries the like of which C# has never seen, and has the rich full-bodied glory that only a language committee and nearly two decades of industry trial-and-error has given. C++ can interface easilly with the kernel, and works well on non-Microsoft OSes. If your codebase is primarilly C++ you also can't afford to move to C#.

Sure you can make bad code in C++ with buffer overruns, but you can make nasty mistakes in C# as well, but not understanding the deletion order of the GC, or by playing with pointers through PInvoke in a way that you shouldn't.

Point is that C++ and C# shouldn't be opposites. F# showed us that Haskell-like languages and C++-like languages can co-exist and can complement each other, rather than fighting in silly "my language is better than yours" wars. Hopefully someday we shall have a G#++, which combines the power, flexibility and interoperability of C++ with the language-independence, managed-ness and nice IDE-ness of C#.

Well not to bust anyones bubbles.  But i'm fairly sure Visual Studio 2008, 2005, 2003 were made in C#.

"Why does C++ even exist? Why does MS keeps maintaining such a language that caused so many buffer overflows, and generally was not as secure as C# or Vb.NET."

Typical of so many newer programmers, they blame the product for their own shortcomings or ignorance.  c++ allows one write as good or bad code as you want. 

"I was wondering why C++ still exists when C# is that good of a language. MS, why not retire C++, and just focus on C# and Vb.NET and F#?"

Because there is to much production code out there worth billions of dollars.   Most notably WINDOWS!!!


"Its confusing many people, and things needs to be simpler, with few languages. C# for experts, VB.NET for beginners and intermediates. "

C# an expert language?  As someone mentioned try writing a device driver in c#. 

When Microsoft bets the farm on .NET i.e Windows, Office, Exchange Server then it is a viable commercial environment.

Thanks for updating MFC. We are using MFC/C++ for more than 10 years and rely on C++/CLI to interop our current code to .Net. So thanks again and anicipating more enhacement of MFC in future!
-Hardik Shah

Windows, Office, Visual Studio, GMail, Google, WordWeb, Skype, SQL Server, Photoshop, AutoCAD...just a list of the most dependable apps I have installed on my machine (the ones which do not crash easily). Where is the .NET?

sairam.
hey, but lot of code that had already been written for lot of successful and highly efficient applications, is itself sufficient to make us realise the importance of C++, which will be keeeping C++ with us for comming lot decades..

it has given us lot of smiles also..

You are such a myopic divy, if you think everything in the future will run on managed code. The problem here is that you are either lazy or stupied enough not to learn c or c++ and as a result you expect everyone else to follow your way and dumb down. Tell me something what language do you think your managed code compiler is written in, your OS, the server OS's that carry your rant to the world??
What about your PDA, Mobile phone, embedded systems???? . Well I can tell you its not managed code otherwise these products would never get off the ground.

So read a book before you open your ill informed mouth. Its no coincidence that your avatar is Homer Simpson.

You are clearly a VB programmer, through and through! (if that)!
C/C++ is why languages like C# even exist.

C/C++ will always be maintained by Microsoft, as it would be in their best interest for many reasons...

Don't forget, that Windows itself, Visual Studio, MFC, Win32 API, C#, VB6 & VB.NET, UNIX, Linux, MAC, DSPAM, ODBC, OLE and SQL Server (just to name a few), are ALL written in C/C++.
VB, VB.NET and C# are also ALL written in C++ (reiteration required for SecretSoftware).
Doesn't that already tell you something. Thinking from this perspective lets you realise why C/C++ should always be supported.

VC++ is the most powerful language when coding in Visual Studio and coding for .NET or non-.NET programs on any platform!!!
C/C++ Syntax is eligant and to the point. It does what you want it to, when you want it to and how you want it to.

The only reason that the people complaining about the language open their mouths against C/C++, is because you'll usually find that they are ammatures, un-professionals, or simply not smart enough to understand what's under the hood of computers.
Can I also just say, "I HATE", the fact that people like you (SecretSoftware) are amongst us real programmers, trying to blend in.

Don't get me wrong VB saves you time, and C# is a good language, Java is excellent too. But C++ is the best!!!
I can mix C++ with Assembly Language, in a hybrid Win32+MFC app, then call upon .NET modules, whilst utilising STL, ATL, COM.
This little scenario is just..... well..... simply; on the otherside of a blackhole-wormhole, compared to what C#/VB can fathom!

Until next time,

The old song that goes..... 'we built this city, we built this city,we built this city on rock, and, roll ......'    etc..
Should be more like: 'we built this world, we built this world,we built this world using C++.


Developer_Dan()

I develop in C C++, VC6,  RAD in VB6, Delphi, Java, Flash

I think Stroustrup said it best "C++ is designed for non trivial code". If you want cookie cutter “Fischer Price” programming then its best you stick to managed code like C# and Java. Anyone doing hard core real time or system level programming should know C, C++, and Assembly. Perhaps people should educate themselves before spewing nonsense.

There's a sucker born every millisecond!!  Perhaps we only need one model of car and one model of hammer and one choice on the menu and one church and one place to hide the uneducated.