Back to Profile: KMNY_a_ha


  • GoingNative Live at BUILD: Herb Sutter, Joanna Mason, Tony Goodhew

    @PFYB do you remember that long time ago I've told you a story about manager, customers and MS attitude to C++ and what will happen w/r to C++ in next VS? Was I wrong in any of those points I mentioned?

  • GoingNative Live at BUILD: Herb Sutter, Joanna Mason, Tony Goodhew

    @Tony yes, definitely, let's shake hands and move on, that's the only way to go.



  • GoingNative Live at BUILD: Herb Sutter, Joanna Mason, Tony Goodhew

    Hi Tony, thank you for your reply.

    Few clarifications:

    Clarification number one, when I wrote 'you' I meant MS *not you* as a Tony Goodhew

    (English as wonderful as it is isn't my first language,  but that you've probably guessed

    long time ago).

    So just to make it straight once and for all - I DO NOT claim that you, Tony

    Goodhew lied to me at any point. Please accept my sincere apologies for not

    specifying this clearly. The only point in my previous post when I've referenced

    you directly (as a Tony not as MS) is when I talk about you not answering to my

    question in one of the threads but as I've mentioned already I'm simply unable to

    find it.

    Clarification number two: No Tony, I do not think that if you (MS) do not

    implement 100% features it automatically means that you don't care, but for the

    love of God at least implement some of them in every future release.

    As for list of my "Most Wanted:"

    0. Whole concurrency model - not just portion of it,

    1. Variadic Templates + everything what concerns work with templates, like for example:

    2. Default template arguments for function templates,

    3. constexpr,

    4. Non-static data member initializers,

    5. Delegating/Inheriting ctors,

    6. Defaulted and deleted fncs.

    On the side:

    I personally do not like to see explanation/implementation in the vain of (this

    is from:

    [begin of quote] "... This makes it (about override/final) an Ascended Extension, as VC already

    supports this "override" syntax on functions, with semantics reasonably close to

    C++11's.  "final" is also supported, but under the different spelling "sealed". 

    This qualifies for "Partial" support in my table."[end of quote]

    Either do it as it should be done or don't do it at all - reasonably close just

    isn't good enough. And as for expecting us to use equivalent (sealed) instead of

    final... As you've suggested Tony, let's move on.


    [Note: ] Tony, I sincerely hope/believe that we (I/C++ community and you/MS) will be able

    to communicate in the future with each other on equal/civilized terms.

    Thank you.


    Artur Czajkowski

  • GoingNative Live at BUILD: Herb Sutter, Joanna Mason, Tony Goodhew

    @Tony the reasons I'm frustrated/irritated/angry/using your product:

    1. Your product is most popular and due to this fact most companies use it, the one I work for uses it too. Now, due to this fact I have to work with your product, and due to this fact in turn I'm somewhat "trapped/forced" to use your product (for the exact same reason I use Windows and MS Office). I hope that this answer to the question why I'm using your product (for most of my work). Now, to the question why I'm so angry/frustrated/irritated. Ok, here we go: I'm not sure how it is in US but here in Europe we like to divide our time between work and family. In order to do so weekends are mostly reserved for the latter. But, but, but, but... As I've already explained, during my working hours I work with your product, which by being incompatible with the new standard disallows me to educate myself and stay on top of the C++ game. In order to do that I'm forced to:

     a) Use different product/compiler during weekends

     b) Instead of spending my dedicated for family time with my family I (because of you not providing conformant compiler) have to spend this time at the computer, and that I think makes me most angry. You literally stealing my family time. Is it good reason to get annoyed? I don't know you tell me.  

    2. Do not lie to me/us (C++ community), treat us with respect - be honest, do not pretend. The whole business with C++ renaissance at MS is a lie. What C++ renaissance? It's C++/CX which conveniently no one from MS before //BUILD bothered to mention. What this created is this: a) you've (MS) raised our (C++ community) hopes and then with one swift blow knocked us down. b) you (MS) still trying to play this disgusting game of pretending that everything is ok and exactly as you've promised. No, it's not. Even those stupid examples on your website that have nothing to do with C++ are marked as C++ examples. What you doing is, you spitting on people's neck and trying to tell them that the rain is raining. Could this be seen as a reason to get irritated/angry/pissed off? I don't know, you tell me.

    3. I bought some time ago for my own private use VS2010, just to be let's say "In your camp/playing on your side/support you etc.". Now it looks that in order to do modern ISO C++ I can throw your product through the window (I hoped that by buying update to will allow me to code in pure C++). But in order to do that I have to get FREE!!! GCC. Does that constitute to an annoying and irritating behaviour on your part? I don't know. Tony, you can answer that for yourself. I think MS is very well aware of the fact that most C++ guys are not really interested in your proprietary extensions etc. Most C++ guys want to code in ISO C++ and are absolutely uninterested in your extensions, which by the way brake C++ syntax - was it really necessary to do so? That's why, those who really love C++ (count me among them) didn't jump on your C# wagon few years ago and they stayed firmly and loyally with what they really love. You, (MS) trying to play on this feelings by raising campaign and trying to pretend that you really care (from now on) about C++ and C++ community. But the truth is that you don't really. Because if you cared Tony, core C++ features would be implemented first. Because they're core to C++ and C++ community. So again, you treating us like some kind of second class citizens, lying and pretending to us and ABSOLUTELY IGNORING what you hear from us:

    Then you're surprised that some of us react harshly to your behaviour. You know, we are also humans, we also need to earn money and we understand that people are working in order to earn it. And I'm telling you right now that if you were honest with us (C++ community) and said something like:

    "Guys, we really do want to engage again with C++ community but for now in order to keep our position in the market we have to do x, y, z (without giving sensitive information of course). Guys, we will not have time to implement core features in next release of VS but please stay with us and we will do everything what's in our power to improve this situation ASAP.

    And let me tell you Tony that this would be received with understanding (because people are good by nature and understand that everyone wants to live) and would earn you credits as being honest company. Company who really cares about its costumers but for obvious reasons must do X,Y and Z in order to stay afloat.

    But no, you (MS) didn't do that (as usual by the way). What you did is was lying/pretending and stalling us and ignore everything what you've heard from us just to at the end reveal that you have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING prepared for C++ devs who want to do modern ISO C++ except for few libraries. Why the priorities have been wrongly assigned? Because you didn't really care/have other more important priorities. Could that be seen as annoying/irritating behaviour?

    4. If you initiated dialog with someone/group of people, please continue it, not break it when the questions became "uneasy". You yourself Tony have been asked on few of the VS forums, also by myself (I've tried to look at this today but unfortunately couldn't find it) questions but did you bother to answer to it. As for very fresh example of starting a dialog and not bothering to continue:

    Is that behaviour expected from professionalists/people who really care about their costumers? Could that be seen as annoying/irritating/arrogant behaviour which has the potential of making people angry? I don't know Tony, you tell me.

    So just quick sum-up:

    1. Do not lie to us, be honest, treat us with respect and you will be rewarded accordingly. This will get you somewhere and people will have respect for you for being honest. Lying/pretending will get you nowhere + you'll get irritated customers + you will be rewarded accordingly.

    2. If you starting something (discussion for example) have the courtesy to continue and finish it in a civilized manner.

    3. Don't be surprised that people are getting annoyed with you due to your negative/arrogant/ignorant behaviour.

    I hope that this answers and explains why I (and I suspect few other people too), can feel irritated and angry with MS.


    Artur Czajkowski

  • Raman Sharma: Building Metro Style Apps with C++ and JavaScript

    And me too. 

  • Using the Windows Runtime from C++

    @Glen, I'm really looking forward to what this guy have as an answers for you.
  • Using the Windows Runtime from C++

    @BarryDale companies are in business for profit - agreed. That's why they avoid like an open fire to get locked in just to one particular platform - because it hurts profit. And using this crap which is presented by ms now is locking you in.
  • C++ and Beyond 2011: Herb Sutter - Why C++?

    @Dave you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. And no C# isn't suitable for high-perf code/app. You must remember that C# is nothing else but java, with the difference that it came out of Microsoft and not from Sun.

  • C++ and Beyond 2011: Herb Sutter - Why C++?

    @Charles, Since when, expressing one's opinion (even though negative) is a trolling? One have to have right and freedom to do it.

    Take a chill pill Charles and relax.

  • C++ and Beyond 2011: Herb Sutter - Why C++?




    1. Perf wise C# is on average 30% to 70% slower than equivalent C++ app.

    2. Compile times? What? I think you're forgetting that we (devs) are creating product for users who don't really care what was the time this app was compiled within. All they want is functionality and performance. C++ deliveres it, C# doesn't. As simple as that. 


    Couldn't agree more with you, when you say why MS have "their" C++ Renaissance.

  • C++ and Beyond 2011: Herb Sutter - Why C++?

    @Gert Jan I don't think you saw recently how modern C++ code looks like nor what can be done with it. And as Benjamin said, there is virtually no need to manage memory manually. Libraries are for that. And Benjamin... C# isn't fast enough. 

  • Checking In: Rick Molloy - Gone Native

    @Charles, fair play, please accept my appologies Charles. I really mean that.

    Let's move along.