[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/12/27]
Aaron J. Grier wrote: > > visual C++? I use that one rarely, for reasons explained below. I hate the builder, but the IDE is pretty good (considering the fact it's C++). > why aren't you playing^Wdeveloping in C#? 1. Most code I write runs on bare metal targets (because it should) and/or on Linux machines (because I have such questionable luck). Bare metal targets rule out managed environments. 2. I haven't look into it, but I assume that .NET implementations outside of Windows have a quality below the level where you can hope to get "portable" code (and by "portable", I mean running on Windows & Un*x). > microsoft has a whole new broken^Wshiny development environment for you! From the words you've accidentally forgot to delete, I sense that you dislike C#. Is this based on experience or on the fact that it comes from Microsoft? You know, they say the German highways built at the time of Hitler are still decent highways. If I used Visual C++ for most of my work (which would probably make me hate it much more than I do today), I'd probably considered switching to C# since: * it compiles fast (no #includes and templates) * building it is easy (no #includes, #defines and templates) * the IDE looks up names, etc. correctly (no #includes, #defines and templates) * I think that for a statically typed language with no built-in data structures, it is not awfully annoying (probably better than Java) Of course using C# probably means that the code is tied to Windows, which may be a problem. > > after all, continuing to use a tool that you've used for years is > counter-productive! > Using tools crafted in the dark ages when better tools are available may be counter-productive, especially if you no longer distinguish between real problems (the ones users are aware of and want solved) and the problems of your tools (such as the dreaded C++ "physical design" - stuffing things into files in a way that will make your build complete while you are still alive). On the other hand, someone can get so good at grepping around the filesystem that definition lookup doesn't look like a win. Some people prefer to create digital images by manually setting one pixel at a time, and if they are good at it, that's fine.
Generated at 03:02 on 01 Jan 2007 by mariachi 0.52