h2inc
in [MFC]
|
From: Stephen Myers on 13 Jan 2010 10:50 Joseph M. Newcomer wrote: > I sometimes install them fairly early in the release cycle, although I usually don't end > up using them for two or three years (I cannot deliver to my clients code that will not > compile on what they are using, and that is usually several years behind any release). > > Only recently, with the ability to have virtual machines, would I ever consider loading a > beta. Since "beta testing" doesn't mean "find flaws in the design" but "find bugs we > failed to find in testing", I see no reason to be an unpaid tester for Microsoft. And I > can't risk the kind of damage a beta can do to a system. I made this mistake some years > ago with a beta and will never, ever repeat it. > > The biggest problem Microsoft has these days is doing really, really, REALLY bad design, > such as the VS .NET IDE or the Office Ribbon; by the time we can make comments on it, it > is far too late to point out that the design was made by someone who was, to put it > mildly, totally clueless about the task of programming, writing documents, or creating > PowerPoint presentations. So I've found the irritation factor of new products usually > more than offsets any features they can offer. > > I use VS 2008 for my new internal development, but external development is still largely > based in VS2003. I appear to lose nothing by this choice. Much of my Web site contains > VS6 code and I have no motivation to update it. My most recent projects are VS2008. > > While VS2010 has a C++ compiler with cool features, I can't actually use any of these cool > features in any product I deliver, because none of my clients use VS2010. Most use > VS2003, some use VS2005, and only two are using VS2008, the last time I checked. The last > VS6 holdouts have moved to VS2005 for new development, but there is no way they are going > to convert their massive base of VS6 code to anything newer (essentially, they have > learned the hard way that upgrades always have "breaking changes" and you don't break > products that are out in the field and working). > > Microsoft's view that "as soon as we release a new version of VS, every programmer in the > known Universe switches to it the day after they receive the distribution disk" is > actually destructive to their credibility. Even the "open source" people make every past > version available for download, even if the version is deprecated. > > Sadly, the problem of maintaining older versions is that you must install them in order; > if you install VS6 after you install VS2010, then every time you double-click a file, you > get the VS6 compiler, because the system has this quaint "file association" mechanism that > does not allow multiple versions to coexist. The fact that all solution files are now > called .sln and project files are called .vcproj, instead of encoding the version in them, > really is a total pain. In a rational world, the extension of the solution files and > project files would change on every release, so you would always launch the correct > (rather than the latest) version of VS for a project. But as we know, software evolves, > because there is little evidence of Intelligent Design anywhere. > joe > > On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 10:05:32 -0500, "SteveR" <maxsrussellatremovethisembarqmail.com> > wrote: > >> I'm wondering, how quickly do you "old" pros jump on the bandwagon with a >> new VS version? Do you also keep an older version handy? >> ----------- >>> Sigh. Another wrinkle in the "every version we ship is less usable than >>> the previous >>> version" approach to new products. >>> joe > Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP] > email: newcomer(a)flounder.com > Web: http://www.flounder.com > MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm We were actively using VS 2003 while upgrading to VS2008. The file association for .sln is to a VSLauncher which did bring up the proper IDE. You are certainly correct that installation order is critical. We skipped VS2005 and didn't move from VS2003 to VS2008 until last year. It comes down to what exactly do you gain by doing the upgrade. The profiling that was added with VS2005 is the only thing that was of much interest to us. The migration was not free, as we have a ton of very old code which generated various new compiler warnings and errors. Steve
From: David Ching on 13 Jan 2010 11:24 "Stephen Myers" <""StephenMyers\"@discussions(a)microsoft.com"> wrote in message news:exZvygGlKHA.1652(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > We skipped VS2005 and didn't move from VS2003 to VS2008 until last year. > It comes down to what exactly do you gain by doing the upgrade. The > profiling that was added with VS2005 is the only thing that was of much > interest to us. The migration was not free, as we have a ton of very old > code which generated various new compiler warnings and errors. > It's interesting how both you and Joe skipped VS2005 in favor of VS2008. For C++, I find no advantage of 2008 over 2005, and in fact 2008 builds more slowly than 2005. So my C++ projects are in 2005 and my .NET projects are in 2008 (for .NET, there are significant advantages of 2008). The only thing remotely interesting in VS2008 for C++ is the MFC Feature Pack, but it is poorly implemented compared to CodeJock so I don't use it. -- David
From: Stephen Myers on 13 Jan 2010 13:26 David Ching wrote: > "Stephen Myers" <""StephenMyers\"@discussions(a)microsoft.com"> wrote in > message news:exZvygGlKHA.1652(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> We skipped VS2005 and didn't move from VS2003 to VS2008 until last >> year. It comes down to what exactly do you gain by doing the upgrade. >> The profiling that was added with VS2005 is the only thing that was of >> much interest to us. The migration was not free, as we have a ton of >> very old code which generated various new compiler warnings and errors. >> > > It's interesting how both you and Joe skipped VS2005 in favor of VS2008. > For C++, I find no advantage of 2008 over 2005, and in fact 2008 builds > more slowly than 2005. So my C++ projects are in 2005 and my .NET > projects are in 2008 (for .NET, there are significant advantages of 2008). > > The only thing remotely interesting in VS2008 for C++ is the MFC Feature > Pack, but it is poorly implemented compared to CodeJock so I don't use it. > > -- David > > We decided to bite the bullet once. One of the reasons was we were using .NET in some projects and as you say there are advantages to 2008. We did revise our builds to use precompiled headers because of the longer build times with 2008. Steve
From: Drew on 14 Jan 2010 14:25 "> We decided to bite the bullet once. One of the reasons was we were > using .NET in some projects and as you say there are advantages to 2008. > > We did revise our builds to use precompiled headers because of the longer > build times with 2008. > > Steve If you want to speed things up even more, and you have a multi-processor machine, use the /MP compiler switch and watch things fly. Drew
From: Giovanni Dicanio on 17 Jan 2010 04:34 "Pete Delgado" <Peter.Delgado(a)NoSpam.com> ha scritto nel messaggio news:#V8imkWjKHA.2188(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Just out of curiousity, what are you using from the feature pack? I use > the TR1 extensions, most notably the regex classes, but not the new > classes within MFC. I'm not sure (I didn't verified), but I think that those extensions are available as freely downloadable Boost code as well, and they work in VS2005 as well. Giovanni
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Prev: Assertions during DLL load Next: AfxGetApp() returned NULL - A possible solution. |