Coffeehouse Thread

33 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

"Calling all Visual Studio 6.0 C/C++ developers!"

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    jonathanh

    (Beer28, I thought of you when I saw this :->)

    The Visual Studio team are finishing up VS.NET 2005, and want to hear from old-school VS 6.0 developers about why they will (or won't) be upgrading. This is probably your last chance to influence the release, so go leave some feedback!

    http://blogs.msdn.com/AprilR/archive/2005/02/18/376494.aspx

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    Beer28 wrote:
    A. you undermined my managed language in Java, because you guys couldn't come up with something original, so you had to go backlashing after you lost the java lawsuit.

    I'm not entirely sure I understand what you mean here.

    Beer28 wrote:
    B. You changed the managed C++ implementation more times than most people change their socks.

    The first version was in 2002. 2003 was pretty much the same. Now they've changed it for 2005. So let's see... the square root of pi... carry the seven... yup, that means it's changed exactly once. You must have really dirty socks by now.

    Beer28 wrote:
    C. You implied and made us believe there was going to be an unmanaged interface to win64 and winFX that we could link totally without clr code, that would not invoke the clr, when in fact there isn't. WinFX totally undermines regular, traditional object code and linking.

    This has nothing to do with Visual Studio.

    Beer28 wrote:
    E. .NET sucks

    Nothing better than to gain respect by using intelligent, well-though-out, properly backed up arguments.

    Beer28 wrote:
    F. I now have a million open source libraries to work with on linux which i can go down to the src level to debug if i have to

    Which, again, has nothing to do with Visual Studio.

    Beer28 wrote:
    G. I will continue to use VC++6 to update my legacy windows apps for 20 years if i have to, changing my library paths in tools->options->directories to new SDK's, or until windows is gone and linux and the collective knowhow of the world takes over.

    I recommend you take a good long walk, or do some breathing exercises, or use a punching bag, or something like that. You obviously have a lot of cropped up hate, if you don't find a way to release it it could be unhealthy.

  • User profile image
    rhm

    I suggest he fucks off and dies. If channel9's admins don't care about his baseless ranting enough to throw him off the site, they'll probably not mind me posting this either.

  • User profile image
    rhm

    heh, an obscenity filter. Cute Smiley

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    I've had no problems with VisualC++ 7.0 (aka Visual C++.Net, hey... it still supports Old-School C (but not Objective-C, unfortunately))

  • User profile image
    rhm

    So, getting back on topic... I know a lot of gamedevs stuck with VC6 because of edit-and-continue. Most use editors like Multiedit and Codewright anyway and use nmake to build so weren't bothered by the now stoneage VC6 IDE.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    I still want multiline find and replace in the IDE!

    ...Like Dreamweaver did

    Although its not much use for programming, its great for mass-editing (X)HTML without having to use Regular Expressions.

  • User profile image
    MrX

    I love the Visual Basic 6!

    but i think C# is good, so im using both

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    If you only write C++ and version 6 works for you why should you upgrade?

  • User profile image
    rhm

    Rossj wrote:
    If you only write C++ and version 6 works for you why should you upgrade?


    Because you might want to use a modern template library and templates are quite broken in VC6. OK, you said "and version 6 works for you" so that might not apply. But you're going to run into template bugs yourself at some point unless you just don't use templates at all (or you use them in a very limited way like the Mozilla codebase does).

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    Don't actually write C++ on Windows, only C or C# so 2003 suits me fine (apart from the bugs).

  • User profile image
    Minh

    Rossj wrote:
    If you only write C++ and version 6 works for you why should you upgrade?
    Doesn't VC++ 2003 use a different .LIB format than VC++ 6.0 ? So newer libs may not be compatible with VC++ 6

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    So when will I get support for distributed builds on Windows? Or is there some way I can do this already?

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    Beer28 wrote:
    W3bbo wrote:I still want multiline find and replace in the IDE!

    ...Like Dreamweaver did

    Although its not much use for programming, its great for mass-editing (X)HTML without having to use Regular Expressions.


    gedit supports multiline searching with \n, it converts line returns/feeds to \n right off the clipboard when you paste into the find box and tabs to \t




    I meant where the search and replace boxes are multiline

  • User profile image
    rhm

    Rossj wrote:
    So when will I get support for distributed builds on Windows? Or is there some way I can do this already?


    There's a 3rd party product for doing this. That name escapes me right now.

  • User profile image
    Minh

    rhm wrote:
    Rossj wrote:So when will I get support for distributed builds on Windows? Or is there some way I can do this already?


    There's a 3rd party product for doing this. That name escapes me right now.
    IncrediBuild?

  • User profile image
    GSSYee

    As I know, C# for VS.NET 2005 will support the feature of refactoring.
    I think it will be great if this feature also available in C++ for VS.NET!

    Just wonder if there is any plan to supports it in future?

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    Rossj wrote:
    If you only write C++ and version 6 works for you why should you upgrade?

    Because VC2003 is a C++ compiler, while VC6 is something that looks like a C++ compiler, but essentially is not?

    Remember, VC6 was released in 1998. That's seven years ago, and what's worse, that's from before the first official C++ standard was accepted. There are many, many points where VC6 does not conform to ANSI/ISO C++.

    VC2003 is 98% standards compliant. The only features it misses afaik are export templates (which only one compiler in the whole world supports, and it took them two years to implement) and exception specifications (which it can compile but doesn't actually use, and imo exception specifications in C++ are useless anyway).

    VC2003 also has a much better optimizer, better security, better everything.

    And that's just the compiler itself. There have also been tremendous advances in compliance with STL (also some support for non-standard but common STL extensions such as <hash_map>), and great advances have been made in ATL/MFC.

    Setting aside the IDE for a moment, even if you don't use Managed C++ or C++/CLI or whatever, there are more than enough reasons to use VC2003, or when Whidbey comes out, VC2005.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.