CUJ and Microsoft C++

[NPC]

Hi,
Is anyone else seeing a pattern with the frequency of Microsoft-related
C++ articles (not including advertisements) appearing in the 'C/C++ Users
Journal' over the last 6 months?

It appears that many of the usual columnists are pushing hard to have the
C++ Standard follow several new inventions in the Managed C++ World.
Mostly, these new inventions appear necessary to solve issues .NET is having
with using only standard C++. Interestingly, it appears that Bjarne
Stroustrop is helping Microsoft resolve some of these issues now.

I've never been too convinced of the latest Microsoft WhizBang (there are
so many dying whizbangs from Redmond after all), but to see articles showing
Bjarne's involvement makes me pause somewhat. I personally feel confident
that he has only the best intentions for Standard C++ in mind. I would like
to see anything Bjarne has to say about C++/CLI - has anyone seen any words
of the sort from Bjarne directly?

Some may think that I'm just another anti-Microsoft kind of guy. I am
not. I am a pro-standards kind of guy - which is why I choose to use
Standard C++. My question to anyone interested in answering is: "Are you
concerned at all about the largest software conglomerate, who also now
boasts > 98% C++ Standards Compliance, leading the charge in how Standard
C++ will change in the future?" Also, "Do you believe that one should only
boast once they have achieved 100% Standards Compliance?" Is 98% good
enough so many years after the Standardization was released? Should it
convince us enough to have Microsoft lead the way for us?

Again, I'm only intersted in 100% Standards Compliance. I hope others do
to. I'm curious.
NPC

[Claudio Puviani]

"NPC" <eu*********@ve rizon.net> wrote

Is anyone else seeing a pattern with the frequency
of Microsoft-related C++ articles (not including
advertisements) appearing in the 'C/C++ Users
Journal' over the last 6 months?
I've stopped finding CUJ relevant a fairly long time ago. Strangely, that
coincided almost exactly with the editorial staff's pitiable attempts to
justify coverage of languages other than C or C++.
It appears that many of the usual columnists are
pushing hard to have the C++ Standard follow
several new inventions in the Managed C++ World.
Mostly, these new inventions appear necessary to
solve issues .NET is having with using only standard
C++. Interestingly, it appears that Bjarne Stroustrop
is helping Microsoft resolve some of these issues now.
Fortunately for us, neither CUJ nor Microsoft has more weight than anyone
else on the standard committee. I'm fully confident that the committee as a
whole will accept only features that will improve the language and flatly
refuse to even consider anything that would make things problematic for the
non-Microsoft world.
I've never been too convinced of the latest Microsoft
WhizBang (there are so many dying whizbangs from
Redmond after all), but to see articles showing Bjarne's
involvement makes me pause somewhat.
That Bjarne is involved in helping Microsoft should also be encouraging. We
can expect more recommendations on how Microsoft could better conform to the
standard than abdications that lead to a bastardization of the language.
I personally feel confident that he has only the best
intentions for Standard C++ in mind. I would like
to see anything Bjarne has to say about C++/CLI
- has anyone seen any words of the sort from Bjarne
directly?
Not I.
Some may think that I'm just another anti-Microsoft
kind of guy. I am not. I am a pro-standards kind
of guy - which is why I choose to use Standard C++.
My question to anyone interested in answering is: "Are
you concerned at all about the largest software
conglomerate, who also now boasts > 98% C++
Standards Compliance, leading the charge in how
Standard C++ will change in the future?"
I'm not in the least concerned, and I don't see this as Microsoft leading
anything, much less anyone following Microsoft.
Also, "Do you believe that one should only boast once
they have achieved 100% Standards Compliance?"
I'd rather see a company admit that they're x% compliant that to have to
guess.
Is 98% good enough so many years after the Standardization
was released?
It's good enough if it supports the subset of the language that a person
uses. The day you encounter code that compiles on another platform that you
use, but not there, then you have something to complain about.
Should it convince us enough to have Microsoft lead the
way for us?
Again, you're turning this into an X-File. There's no conspiracy here.
Microsoft does its thing and it hasn't impacted the standard C++ community
where it didn't want to be impacted. Do you see "far" and "near" anywhere in
the standard? Or any other mutilations that Microsoft and Borland and others
have introduced in the past nearly 20 years? Give the folks on the committee
the benefit of the doubt.
Again, I'm only intersted in 100% Standards Compliance.
You must spend a lot of time on the unemployment line if that's what you're
waiting for. In the real world, if you're mandated to write software for
platform X, you use the tools that are available. You don't get the luxury
of going on strike because your compiler isn't 100% compliant. Even when
there's a choice of compilers, issues like correctness, performance, and
compatibility with existing libraries tend to take precedence over
compliance with the standard.
I hope others do too.

Not likely, unless they don't have to deal with reality.

Claudio Puviani

[NPC]

>

Again, I'm only intersted in 100% Standards Compliance.
You must spend a lot of time on the unemployment line if that's what

you're waiting for. In the real world, if you're mandated to write software for
platform X, you use the tools that are available. You don't get the luxury
of going on strike because your compiler isn't 100% compliant. Even when
there's a choice of compilers, issues like correctness, performance, and
compatibility with existing libraries tend to take precedence over
compliance with the standard.

I hope others do too.

Not likely, unless they don't have to deal with reality.

Claudio Puviani

Interesting comments. A bit derogatory and unfounded, which I have to
come to expect from some here (unfortunately) . Your comments on my
unemployment status are somewhat funny after seeing so many similar comments
by you to others here... some sort of OCD related to your own fears of
unemployment is my guess.

Nope - never spent a day in the unemployment line. Although, there have
been times when I would have enjoyed the break...

If you believe that there could be no influence by the leaders of the C++
committee, then your view of politics are very idealistic and childish. I
really am simply asking for others opinions about my questions - not real
interested in your judgement of me.

BTW, you may find www.comeucomputing.com interesting in terms of standards
compliance.

[NPC]

make that http://www.comeaucomputing.com/ - sorry, I'm tired.

[Leor Zolman]

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 04:36:26 GMT, "NPC" <eu*********@ve rizon.net> wrote:

BTW, you may find www.comeucomputing.com interesting in terms of standards
compliance.

Out of curiosity, in what sense did you mean he might find Comeau
"interestin g"? (I use Comeau, so I'm well aware of its level of Standards
conformance. I'm just wondering what you meant.)
-leor

--
Leor Zolman --- BD Software --- www.bdsoft.com
On-Site Training in C/C++, Java, Perl and Unix
C++ users: Download BD Software's free STL Error Message Decryptor at:
www.bdsoft.com/tools/stlfilt.html

[Claudio Puviani]

"NPC" <eu*********@ve rizon.net> wrote

Again, I'm only intersted in 100% Standards Compliance.
You must spend a lot of time on the unemployment
line if that's what you're waiting for. In the real world,
if you're mandated to write software for platform X,
you use the tools that are available. You don't get the
luxury of going on strike because your compiler isn't
100% compliant. Even when there's a choice of compilers,
issues like correctness, performance, and compatibility
with existing libraries tend to take precedence over
compliance with the standard.

I hope others do too.

Not likely, unless they don't have to deal with reality.

Interesting comments. A bit derogatory

It's hard to be complimentary towards blind idealism.
and unfounded, which I have to come to expect
from some here (unfortunately) .
16 years of having to deal with real issues concerning C++ compilers instead
of wishing the world to be a perfect place is hardly unfounded. The fact
that compliance is of secondary importance in the real world is not only
founded, it's easily verifiable.
Your comments on my unemployment status are
somewhat funny after seeing so many similar
comments by you to others here...
If you bother to look at the context, you'll notice that what that sentence
says is "you'll suffocate if you hold your breath for 100% compliance." Only
paranoia would lead to it being parsed as "I thing you're unemployed."
However, yes, there have been prior discussions regarding real unemployment.
some sort of OCD related to your own fears of
unemployment is my guess.
I sure hope your programming is better than your pop psychology. My concern,
when the topic is actually employment, is that a disturbing proportion of
programmers is unprepared for the job market. It takes months and dozens of
interviews to find one qualified candidate. That's a serious problem for
both employers and prospective employees.
Nope - never spent a day in the unemployment line.
Although, there have been times when I would have
enjoyed the break...
Once more, that wasn't the gist of my comment, so this is irrelevant.
If you believe that there could be no influence by the
leaders of the C++ committee, then your view of
politics are very idealistic and childish.
This from someone who only accepts 100% compliance. Right.
I really am simply asking for others opinions about my questions
We all see how you react to others' opinions. What you want is for someone
to agree with you. Counterargument s are clearly not welcome.
not real interested in your judgement of me.
My judgment was of your interpretation of the situation, which you
explicitly asked for. I have no opinion of you other than that your view of
the standardization process is skewed.
BTW, you may find www.comeucomputing.com interesting
in terms of standards compliance.

Comeau's compiler is well respected for its compliance and often used to
validate code, but it's not commonly used in production for many of the
reasons I listed.

Next time, you might want to add "please respond only if you agree with me."

Claudio Puviani

[NPC]

Again, my response is only to your need to be derogatory toward others. As
before, I see this is a common trend with your replies. Disagreement with
me is nonsensical in the sense that I made no claims. I did want an opinion
about my questions - not about me. My entire response to you has only been
to point out that your comments are very derogatory towards others.

As to your know-all attitude about what the markets are/what employers
need/what employers are looking for/etc., I may suggest that you consider
the stock market for a living rather than beating up on newbies in the C++
newsgroups (which I am not).

I find little need to defend Comeau's compiler. Indicating that its
performance is poor is just plain silly.

Chow.

[Gary Labowitz]

"NPC" <eu*********@ve rizon.net> wrote in message
news:Jc******** **********@nwrd dc03.gnilink.ne t...
<<snip>>

As to your know-all attitude about what the markets are/what employers need/what employers are looking for/etc., I may suggest that you consider the stock market for a living rather than beating up on newbies in the C++ newsgroups (which I am not).

Please do not send him here. He is OT. (signed) The stock market.

But really folks ... I was considering resubscribing to CUJ after
having let my subscription lapse for about a year. Has the magazine
becomes so bad I shouldn't bother? By "bad" I mean irrelevant to
standard C/C++ coding practices.
The last article I remember reading that interested me was about smart
pointers and reference counting.
--
Gary

[NPC]

> But really folks ... I was considering resubscribing to CUJ after

having let my subscription lapse for about a year. Has the magazine
becomes so bad I shouldn't bother? By "bad" I mean irrelevant to
standard C/C++ coding practices.
The last article I remember reading that interested me was about smart
pointers and reference counting.
--
Gary

To be honest, I think that CUJ is still a very good magazine. I think it
has been a bit biased recently, but I could really be wrong. In the last
issue (Web Services - May 2004), I would approximate > 70% of the articles
were related to .NET/COM/Microsoft in some way. Tough to ignore Microsoft
in the software world though...

[Mike Wahler]

"Gary Labowitz" <gl*******@comc ast.net> wrote in message
news:JL******** ************@co mcast.com...

"NPC" <eu*********@ve rizon.net> wrote in message
news:Jc******** **********@nwrd dc03.gnilink.ne t...
<<snip>>

As to your know-all attitude about what the markets are/what

employers

need/what employers are looking for/etc., I may suggest that you

consider

the stock market for a living rather than beating up on newbies in

the C++

newsgroups (which I am not).

Please do not send him here. He is OT. (signed) The stock market.

But really folks ... I was considering resubscribing to CUJ after
having let my subscription lapse for about a year. Has the magazine
becomes so bad I shouldn't bother? By "bad" I mean irrelevant to
standard C/C++ coding practices.
The last article I remember reading that interested me was about smart
pointers and reference counting.

I've been a subscriber of CUJ for many years, and I still
find it interesting and useful.

But of course, YMMV.

$.02,
-Mike