Nice discussion, thanks for making it available.
Aug 21, 2012 at 11:43AM
While I enjoyed the talk, I got disappointed that the future of F# part did not address the 2nd class status that F# seems currently to enjoy in Visual Studio.
I for one would like to have proper F# support for Web development, WP and Windows 8 in Visual Studio.
@Petr:I think Microsoft is still uncertain what to do with F#. Microsoft does not even promote it as a Windows 8 development language.
What I kind of missed on the discussion was the reference of all languages that would be considered managed but actually compile to native code, like Delphi, Modula-3, Ada, Haskell, Ocaml, just to cite a few examples.
Maybe we could get some videos in "going native" that talk about these type of languages, which blend programmer productivity with native code generation.
Feb 25, 2012 at 2:55AM
Thanks for showing the interview about D.
Keep going the good work to bring native programming back into the spotlight.
Quite a nice video.
Thanks for sharing it.
@Bernd: It already exists and is called Qt.
Joking aside, you are correct. It would be quite possible to create a more up to date library in modern C++ that follows .Net design, but I guess it is not in Microsoft plans.
Since I haven't not seen it, I guess someone needs to again make the issue that Microsoft is the only C and C++ compiler vendor that does not implement any C99 features.
And regarding C++ I am really happy that Microsoft has realized that C++ still drives the world and many programmers use it every day.
Still it would be nice if C++ would get the same attention as the managed languages in Visual Studio.
It is nice to see Microsoft noticing that C++ still plays a major role in today's computing, but for me it still fails short.
The adherence to standard seems to be only to the features that Microsoft needs to write certain types of libraries, not with the language itself. Would have you improved your support if it wasn't for the new driving factors that are making C++ relevant again?
As for C99, it feels like an excuse. You mentioned gcc, but the truth is that Microsoft is the only vendor that supports 0 features from C99:
So all existing vendors are able at least to support give partiall support except for Microsoft.
For me this sounds like a political agenda, focusing only on .Net with "just enough" support to the rest of us.
And now you expect us to shell out again more than thousand euros to a vNext release to get back features that were already there to begin with?!