By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
432,569 Members | 1,386 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 432,569 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

simple questions

P: n/a
I started with Visual C++ 6.0 and have gotten C#.NET
though I haven't had time to use it yet. What is the
nutshell difference between C++.NET and C#.NET and if I
had C++.NET will it install easily as I've already
configured the system to what C#.NET requires.
I would be doing small aps in a public safety
environment.
Nov 15 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
3 Replies


P: n/a
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 22:13:22 -0800, Harry P
<an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
I started with Visual C++ 6.0 and have gotten C#.NET
though I haven't had time to use it yet. What is the
nutshell difference between C++.NET and C#.NET
I think that C++.NET is mainly for accessing framework code for use in a
non .net framework environment. It isn't the language you should use if
your application is pure .net framework.
C# is closely linked to Visual Studio .Net and .Net framework and in a
sense, Visual Studio .Net is written for C# and C# is written for Visual
Studio .Net. (VB.Net may be equally easy to use)
and if I
had C++.NET will it install easily as I've already
configured the system to what C#.NET requires.
Can't see why not.
I would be doing small aps in a public safety
environment.


If the application isn't time critical or it uses large amounts of GUI I
would go for C#

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Nov 15 '05 #2

P: n/a
I am wondering what is the problem in going for C# if the
application has to be time critical....
-----Original Message-----
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 22:13:22 -0800, Harry P
<an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
I started with Visual C++ 6.0 and have gotten C#.NET
though I haven't had time to use it yet. What is the
nutshell difference between C++.NET and C#.NET
I think that C++.NET is mainly for accessing framework

code for use in anon .net framework environment. It isn't the language you should use ifyour application is pure .net framework.
C# is closely linked to Visual Studio .Net and .Net framework and in asense, Visual Studio .Net is written for C# and C# is written for VisualStudio .Net. (VB.Net may be equally easy to use)
and if I
had C++.NET will it install easily as I've already
configured the system to what C#.NET requires.
Can't see why not.
I would be doing small aps in a public safety
environment.


If the application isn't time critical or it uses large

amounts of GUI Iwould go for C#

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/.

Nov 15 '05 #3

P: n/a
-----Original Message-----
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 22:13:22 -0800, Harry P
<an*******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
I started with Visual C++ 6.0 and have gotten C#.NET
though I haven't had time to use it yet. What is the
nutshell difference between C++.NET and C#.NET
I think that C++.NET is mainly for accessing framework

code for use in anon .net framework environment. It isn't the language you should use ifyour application is pure .net framework.
C# is closely linked to Visual Studio .Net and .Net framework and in asense, Visual Studio .Net is written for C# and C# is written for VisualStudio .Net. (VB.Net may be equally easy to use)
and if I
had C++.NET will it install easily as I've already
configured the system to what C#.NET requires.
Can't see why not.
I would be doing small aps in a public safety
environment.


If the application isn't time critical or it uses large

amounts of GUI Iwould go for C#

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/.
Sounds good. 'Time Critical' in my environment simply

means how late and overbudget you care to be considering
that everyone will change their minds after seeing the
first prototype. Thanks.
Nov 15 '05 #4

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.