Visual C++ Book
in [MFC]
|
Prev: DoModal Broken in Debug Mode in VS2005 SP1
Next: Default beep when clicking in list control on Vista
From: David Ching on 1 Apr 2007 10:49 "Tom Serface" <tom.nospam(a)camaswood.com> wrote in message news:75DD683B-B3DF-46CF-820E-7288A9A52D77(a)microsoft.com... > Half question and half comment: If I remember right from my short class > all of the libraries (facilities) of .NET are available to both C# and C++ > right? So there is nothing C# can do that C++ can't do. The only thing I > remember really missing is Class Designer, but since I didn't use it much > I don't miss it much yet. Also, the data tips things work better in C#, > if I remember, and you didn't have to type as much to get stuff done. > There seems to be a lot of C# sample code on sites like CodeProject and > CodeGuru and third party libraries are starting to pop up. So, you can't > really argue with success. I think Microsoft's idea of improving C++ for > native makes a lot of sense if it wants to stay in the game with C++. Why > not have C++ be the best (since it's really the only logical) way to write > "safe" native programs? > Yes, C++ works with all current .NET libraries. Future .NET libraries that won't work with C++ are XAML and LINQ. IDE tools like the Class Designer, data tips, refactoring, etc. are better for C#. Also, more third party plug-ins are available for C#. Microsoft has promised to make these better for C++ in Orcas+1, but that will take awhile. VC++ is currently the only Microsoft tool that develops native code. Period. So improving the VC++ story for native code developers is a good strategy. -- David
From: David Ching on 1 Apr 2007 11:02 "Tom Serface" <tom.nospam(a)camaswood.com> wrote in message news:51FEE0BE-5452-4F1E-9048-604F8AC5AA74(a)microsoft.com... >I think what makes C# successful: > > 1. Microsoft really pushes it as being "more cool". > 2. They get all of the VS functionality for .NET > 3. Microsoft using the excuse that C++ is "too difficult" to do some of > the functionality that C# has so naturally people think C++ is "more > difficult" > 4. C# gets the "new stuff" a release before C++, at least, which is > usually over a year. Thus C# gets momentum. > > What makes C++ successful: > > 1. C# can't do native > 2. .NET still not a speed demon so not suitable for all applications > 3. Lots of people were already using MFC/C++ > Tom, this is a good summary. -- David
From: MrAsm on 1 Apr 2007 11:55 On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 15:02:40 GMT, "David Ching" <dc(a)remove-this.dcsoft.com> wrote: >"Tom Serface" <tom.nospam(a)camaswood.com> wrote in message >news:51FEE0BE-5452-4F1E-9048-604F8AC5AA74(a)microsoft.com... >>I think what makes C# successful: >> >> 1. Microsoft really pushes it as being "more cool". >> 2. They get all of the VS functionality for .NET >> 3. Microsoft using the excuse that C++ is "too difficult" to do some of >> the functionality that C# has so naturally people think C++ is "more >> difficult" >> 4. C# gets the "new stuff" a release before C++, at least, which is >> usually over a year. Thus C# gets momentum. >> >> What makes C++ successful: >> >> 1. C# can't do native >> 2. .NET still not a speed demon so not suitable for all applications >> 3. Lots of people were already using MFC/C++ >> > >Tom, this is a good summary. > >-- David > Yes, I do agree with Tom's points, too. MrAsm
From: Ajay Kalra on 1 Apr 2007 12:38 > 1. C# can't do native Why would you want it? Why should a managed app worry about native? > 2. .NET still not a speed demon so not suitable for all applications I am not sure if this is true. --- Ajay
From: Tom Serface on 1 Apr 2007 15:05
I'm not saying a managed application would want native, just that C# couldn't do it so there is still a niche for C++ in that regard. Tom "Ajay Kalra" <ajaykalra(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1175445529.706827.5020(a)l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... >> 1. C# can't do native > > Why would you want it? Why should a managed app worry about native? > |