Why are some of you sceptic about VC++.NET?
Author
Why are some of you a bit 'sceptic' about VC++.NET and for now rather stick with VC++?
[edited by - benhus on May 30, 2002 4:34:03 AM]
Because it will cost me more money, the IDE is slower, because MS are well known for pretending their latest and greatest effort is amazing when in fact it''s just a trivial iteration of what has gone before, and because it''s only MS/Windows people who have got into the cycle of feeling they need to upgrade something every time something new comes along.
[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost | Asking Questions | Organising code files ]
[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost | Asking Questions | Organising code files ]
I''m not a Microsoftie by any stretch (I''m closer now than when I was an active Amigan 
but VS.Net compile times are much quicker than VC6. While at GDC I sat in on a developer chat with some of the VS.Net team and they claim the code is 10% faster... I haven''t verified this myself... but I''m sticking to VC++6 until I can justify the switch 
Dave "Dak Lozar" Loeser †
but VS.Net compile times are much quicker than VC6. While at GDC I sat in on a developer chat with some of the VS.Net team and they claim the code is 10% faster... I haven''t verified this myself... but I''m sticking to VC++6 until I can justify the switch Dave "Dak Lozar" Loeser †
VC++ only works on Win2k and XP, and lots of people still have 98. (Maybe I''m alone on this one, though)
Wow, Kylotan! You summed up mine, and I''m pretty sure everyone else''s thoughts! That''s probably the most complete and perfect description of my M$ skepticism!
----
"Caw, caw, BANG f**k I''m dead!" --The Crow
----
"Caw, caw, BANG f**k I''m dead!" --The Crow
Because it''s new, and VC++ 6 does the job fine, for now.
AND...service packs are still yet to come...which they will.
It''s all you need
AND...service packs are still yet to come...which they will.
It''s all you need
Hey guys,
I''m using .Net at work now, and it is cooler in some ways, and less cool than 6.0 in others. As with every new ms product they succesfully moved all the settings and stuff around so that you need to go searching for every setting again (like workspace is now called ''solution''). But other than that they put in some pretty cool stuff as well. I like the feature where your workspace can be on a bar that extends when you move the mouse over it, etc. And they _finally_ put in search and replace in multiple files. The scripting/macro''s are pretty extensive as well now, so you can do lots to customize your workspace.
I cannot say if compiling is actually faster, as the machine I''m working on is several magnitudes faster than my computer at home (darn! ). One thing I really think is slow though is when you press build solution when it is already built, it takes quite a long while for .Net to figure out that everything is already fine and dandy.
Anyway, hope to have given you some idea... then again maybe not..
Nick
I''m using .Net at work now, and it is cooler in some ways, and less cool than 6.0 in others. As with every new ms product they succesfully moved all the settings and stuff around so that you need to go searching for every setting again (like workspace is now called ''solution''). But other than that they put in some pretty cool stuff as well. I like the feature where your workspace can be on a bar that extends when you move the mouse over it, etc. And they _finally_ put in search and replace in multiple files. The scripting/macro''s are pretty extensive as well now, so you can do lots to customize your workspace.
I cannot say if compiling is actually faster, as the machine I''m working on is several magnitudes faster than my computer at home (darn!
). One thing I really think is slow though is when you press build solution when it is already built, it takes quite a long while for .Net to figure out that everything is already fine and dandy.Anyway, hope to have given you some idea... then again maybe not..
Nick
quote:Original post by Gorg
Because the compiler is still not as standard compliant as it should be.
Well, the question was "why stick with version 6?", as opposed to "why don''t you use VC++ at all?"
VC.NET is a lot more compliant than 6 was.
And I can testify that (as long as you have pre-compiled headers) compile times are significatly faster - at least for my project - from about 2 1/2 minutes to just over 1 minute for a full build. Not bad!
codeka.com - Just click it.
As Kylotan already said, because it would cost money. More than I want to spend for what I would gain. Period.
As a second argument, IMO if you are not able to accomplish a (real world) task with VC++6.0, it''s 99% that you''re not good enough, and 1% that the compiler is out-dated and you need .NET. Buying a newr/better/faster car won''t instantly make you a better driver, you know.
Forever trusting who we are
And nothing else matters - Metallica
As a second argument, IMO if you are not able to accomplish a (real world) task with VC++6.0, it''s 99% that you''re not good enough, and 1% that the compiler is out-dated and you need .NET. Buying a newr/better/faster car won''t instantly make you a better driver, you know.
Forever trusting who we are
And nothing else matters - Metallica
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
