471,075 Members | 759 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post +

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 471,075 software developers and data experts.

Is VC++ .NET dead/dying?

I have cruised around

http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/ and the rest of the site, and i am
not able to find a single C++ or VC++ certification exam that will be
available after June 30, 2004. I emailed support, and the reply was:
"We understand your concerns in this matter.

We would like to inform you that at this moment we do not have any plan or information if there will be replacements for the discontinued exams."

Does anybody know if any C/C++/VC++
certification exams are being planned that will replace those that are
being obsoleted?

P.S. Does this mean that VC++ as a language is likely to obsoleted, and
future versions of Visual Studio will come w/o VC++ support as well? I know
there is a 2005 release of VC++ coming up. I am a little confused. Is
VC++ being completely replaced by C# after that? It looks like native
code will still be used in LognHorn, based on some references on the
site. Some big-font clarification on the site (by Microsoft) itself would probably be
useful to many people, not just me.
P.P.S. I still don't believe that MS Office, for instance, will come in non-native fashion. Mainly because then everybody will be able to decompile it. And i think MS is not a fan of that happening.
P.P.P.S. Given that roughly 50% or so of MS apps code in the future is still very likely to be native, why discontinue native-code certifications w/o a replacement? Or there VC++ .Net certification in the pipeline to replace 6.0? If yes, then when?

Thanks,
<rsa/>
Nov 17 '05 #1
7 2617
>
P.S. Does this mean that VC++ as a language is likely to obsoleted, and

It is true that C# would be used as the default .NET framework programming language but I believe that real programmers will still work on Managed C++.

You cannot expect people to convert all their C++ code to C#. With C++ you can have mixed native and managed code. Which means that you have native dlls as well as managed stuff in your application.

This enables to slowly move to .NET framework. I am not sure about the training courses myself but I suggest you wait for a beta1 for the product and then there should be a lot of discussions and trainings on the same.

Thanks.
Nov 17 '05 #2
Managed C++ is having a major syntax change in vs2005. From this, we
can derive two important facts:
1) after spending a lot of time & money on C++, MS is not going to
abandon it, and,
2) All existing C++ MSCD exams will need to be discontinued and
replaced.

The new exams will almost certainly be out in a few months.
--
Truth,
James Curran
Home: www.noveltheory.com Work: www.njtheater.com
Blog: www.honestillusion.com Day Job: www.partsearch.com
(note new day job!)

"ultranet" <ul******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:20**********************************@microsof t.com...
I have cruised around

http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/ and the rest of the site, and i am
not able to find a single C++ or VC++ certification exam that will be
available after June 30, 2004. I emailed support, and the reply was:
"We understand your concerns in this matter.

We would like to inform you that at this moment we do not have any plan or information if there will be replacements for the discontinued exams."
Does anybody know if any C/C++/VC++
certification exams are being planned that will replace those that are
being obsoleted?

P.S. Does this mean that VC++ as a language is likely to obsoleted, and
future versions of Visual Studio will come w/o VC++ support as well? I know there is a 2005 release of VC++ coming up. I am a little confused. Is
VC++ being completely replaced by C# after that? It looks like native
code will still be used in LognHorn, based on some references on the
site. Some big-font clarification on the site (by Microsoft) itself would probably be useful to many people, not just me.
P.P.S. I still don't believe that MS Office, for instance, will come in non-native fashion. Mainly because then everybody will be able to decompile
it. And i think MS is not a fan of that happening. P.P.P.S. Given that roughly 50% or so of MS apps code in the future is still very likely to be native, why discontinue native-code certifications
w/o a replacement? Or there VC++ .Net certification in the pipeline to
replace 6.0? If yes, then when?
Thanks,
<rsa/>

Nov 17 '05 #3
Sadly they will not be out that soon. The development cycles for this
material are quite long and we don't have a firm plan in place yet (but are
working towards one). Training and certification being available around the
time 8.0 RTMs is probably more realistic. And no, I can't offer a concrete
date for the latter. ;-)

Ronald

"James Curran" <Ja*********@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:Oy*************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
Managed C++ is having a major syntax change in vs2005. From this, we
can derive two important facts:
1) after spending a lot of time & money on C++, MS is not going to
abandon it, and,
2) All existing C++ MSCD exams will need to be discontinued and
replaced.

The new exams will almost certainly be out in a few months.
--
Truth,
James Curran
Home: www.noveltheory.com Work: www.njtheater.com
Blog: www.honestillusion.com Day Job: www.partsearch.com
(note new day job!)

"ultranet" <ul******@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:20**********************************@microsof t.com...
I have cruised around

http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/ and the rest of the site, and i am
not able to find a single C++ or VC++ certification exam that will be
available after June 30, 2004. I emailed support, and the reply was:
"We understand your concerns in this matter.

We would like to inform you that at this moment we do not have any plan
or

information if there will be replacements for the discontinued exams."

Does anybody know if any C/C++/VC++
certification exams are being planned that will replace those that are
being obsoleted?

P.S. Does this mean that VC++ as a language is likely to obsoleted, and
future versions of Visual Studio will come w/o VC++ support as well? I

know
there is a 2005 release of VC++ coming up. I am a little confused. Is
VC++ being completely replaced by C# after that? It looks like native
code will still be used in LognHorn, based on some references on the
site. Some big-font clarification on the site (by Microsoft) itself would

probably be
useful to many people, not just me.
P.P.S. I still don't believe that MS Office, for instance, will come in

non-native fashion. Mainly because then everybody will be able to
decompile
it. And i think MS is not a fan of that happening.
P.P.P.S. Given that roughly 50% or so of MS apps code in the future is

still very likely to be native, why discontinue native-code certifications
w/o a replacement? Or there VC++ .Net certification in the pipeline to
replace 6.0? If yes, then when?

Thanks,
<rsa/>


Nov 17 '05 #4
ultranet wrote:
This is already an operational estimate. :) Thanks all. And sorry i
turned out to have initiated 2 threads (i got an error for the first
one, and did realize it actually posted).

P.S. The last thing that would be nice to know if whether it's worth
studying VC++ .Net 7.0 now, or whether it's better to wait for new
tutorials/books based on 8.0. If 8.0 is not a fundamental overhaul in
comparison to 7.0, then i'll keep studying what i've been studying.


If you're studying ISO standard, native C++ then by all means, study and
learn VC7.1 (Visual Studio .NET 2003). The Whidbey (VC8) IDE has many small
differences, but overall you'll be able to find your way around with few
problems if you're used to 7.1. From a language standpoint, VC8 has a number
of bug fixes, but no new language features for native code development
(there are other non-language-specific new features for native development).

If, however, you want to learn .NET programming (i.e. targeting the CLR,
using the .NET framework) using C++, then I'd recommend waiting for Whidbey.
The new C++/CLI syntax is quite a bit different from the Managed Extensions
for C++ that's supported by VC7{.1}. Learning MC++ won't help you much with
C++/CLI, and it's fraught with pitfalls and dark corners that are best
avoided if you can help it.

-cd
Nov 17 '05 #5
I'd appreciate if we could make this more concrete. Which of the following will still be of use in 8.0:
1. MFC Essentials
2. MFC Doc-View architecture
3. COM, Automation, ActiveX, and OLE
4. Programming for the Internet (WinSock, VC++ .Net and DHTML and ATL, ATL Server)
5. .Net: MC++, Windows Forms and MC++, ASP .Net and MC++, ADO.Net and MC++

The first 4 are based on traditional VC++, and the last one is on MC++ extensions.
I understand that it's not much use studying 5., other than .Net basics. It also appears that 3. is being replaced by CLR programming. Is this correct?
Is it worth studying 1., 2., and 4.? For example, i heard that 2. might still be (at least considered and chosen as) useful even in .Net times.

P.S. I have VC++ .Net 2002 (which i believe is 7.0), and the book i have ("Programming with Microsoft Visual C++ .NET", by George Shepherd, and David Kruglinski, 6th edition, 2003) uses the same. It's not the same as 7.1 (2003) that you refer to, but will it do for my purposes of studying material that will still be relevant in 8.0?

Thanks again,
<rsa/>

"Carl Daniel [VC++ MVP]" wrote:
ultranet wrote:
This is already an operational estimate. :) Thanks all. And sorry i
turned out to have initiated 2 threads (i got an error for the first
one, and did realize it actually posted).

P.S. The last thing that would be nice to know if whether it's worth
studying VC++ .Net 7.0 now, or whether it's better to wait for new
tutorials/books based on 8.0. If 8.0 is not a fundamental overhaul in
comparison to 7.0, then i'll keep studying what i've been studying.


If you're studying ISO standard, native C++ then by all means, study and
learn VC7.1 (Visual Studio .NET 2003). The Whidbey (VC8) IDE has many small
differences, but overall you'll be able to find your way around with few
problems if you're used to 7.1. From a language standpoint, VC8 has a number
of bug fixes, but no new language features for native code development
(there are other non-language-specific new features for native development).

If, however, you want to learn .NET programming (i.e. targeting the CLR,
using the .NET framework) using C++, then I'd recommend waiting for Whidbey.
The new C++/CLI syntax is quite a bit different from the Managed Extensions
for C++ that's supported by VC7{.1}. Learning MC++ won't help you much with
C++/CLI, and it's fraught with pitfalls and dark corners that are best
avoided if you can help it.

-cd

Nov 17 '05 #6
ultranet wrote:
I'd appreciate if we could make this more concrete. Which of the
following will still be of use in 8.0:
1. MFC Essentials
Yep.
2. MFC Doc-View architecture
Yep.
3. COM, Automation, ActiveX, and OLE
Yep.
4. Programming for the Internet (WinSock, VC++ .Net and DHTML and
ATL, ATL Server)
Yep.
5. .Net: MC++, Windows Forms and MC++, ASP .Net and MC++, ADO.Net and
MC++
Significantly different - MUCH easier with VC8. Managed Extensions for C++
(the old way) are still supported under Whidbey, but you'd use the new
C++/CLI for new work - it's so much easier and more powerful.
The first 4 are based on traditional VC++, and the last one is on
MC++ extensions.
I understand that it's not much use studying 5., other than .Net
basics. It also appears that 3. is being replaced by CLR programming.
Is this correct?
..NET and COM/OLE can serve many of the same purposes, but there are still
many applicaitons for native COM development. You can of course develop COM
components using .NET, but if you need to deploy to machines without .NET
installed, you might choose to develop using ATL, for example.
Is it worth studying 1., 2., and 4.? For example, i heard that 2.
might still be (at least considered and chosen as) useful even in
.Net times.
MFC is not going away any time soon. The application framework embodied in
MFC is far richer than the Windows Forms model that .NET includes. While
there's not likely to be a great deal of significant new innovation in MFC
in coming releases, it'll be supported and will continue to be a major
player. Likewise ATL. I wouldn't spend time learning ATL Server as it is
definitely being overshadowed by the web service support in ASP.NET and the
..NET framework itself (although ATL Server is reported more efficient, many
new web services features will simply not be available in ATL server).
P.S. I have VC++ .Net 2002 (which i believe is 7.0), and the book i
have ("Programming with Microsoft Visual C++ .NET", by George
Shepherd, and David Kruglinski, 6th edition, 2003) uses the same.
It's not the same as 7.1 (2003) that you refer to, but will it do for
my purposes of studying material that will still be relevant in 8.0?


You're correct - .NET 2002 is VC7. For studying native C++, VC7.1 is a much
better choice in my opinion due to significantly increased standards
conformance. If you're limiting your native C++ to MFC and ATL applications
(which don't typically make use of some of the more advanced features of the
C++ language), then you'll be fine with VC7 until Whidbey comes along.

-cd
Nov 17 '05 #7
Thank you all so much. Now i have a clear picture, and a clear plan of study for myself.

Thanks again,
<rsa/>

"Carl Daniel [VC++ MVP]" wrote:
ultranet wrote:
I'd appreciate if we could make this more concrete. Which of the
following will still be of use in 8.0:
1. MFC Essentials


Yep.
2. MFC Doc-View architecture


Yep.
3. COM, Automation, ActiveX, and OLE


Yep.
4. Programming for the Internet (WinSock, VC++ .Net and DHTML and
ATL, ATL Server)


Yep.
5. .Net: MC++, Windows Forms and MC++, ASP .Net and MC++, ADO.Net and
MC++


Significantly different - MUCH easier with VC8. Managed Extensions for C++
(the old way) are still supported under Whidbey, but you'd use the new
C++/CLI for new work - it's so much easier and more powerful.
The first 4 are based on traditional VC++, and the last one is on
MC++ extensions.
I understand that it's not much use studying 5., other than .Net
basics. It also appears that 3. is being replaced by CLR programming.
Is this correct?


..NET and COM/OLE can serve many of the same purposes, but there are still
many applicaitons for native COM development. You can of course develop COM
components using .NET, but if you need to deploy to machines without .NET
installed, you might choose to develop using ATL, for example.
Is it worth studying 1., 2., and 4.? For example, i heard that 2.
might still be (at least considered and chosen as) useful even in
.Net times.


MFC is not going away any time soon. The application framework embodied in
MFC is far richer than the Windows Forms model that .NET includes. While
there's not likely to be a great deal of significant new innovation in MFC
in coming releases, it'll be supported and will continue to be a major
player. Likewise ATL. I wouldn't spend time learning ATL Server as it is
definitely being overshadowed by the web service support in ASP.NET and the
..NET framework itself (although ATL Server is reported more efficient, many
new web services features will simply not be available in ATL server).
P.S. I have VC++ .Net 2002 (which i believe is 7.0), and the book i
have ("Programming with Microsoft Visual C++ .NET", by George
Shepherd, and David Kruglinski, 6th edition, 2003) uses the same.
It's not the same as 7.1 (2003) that you refer to, but will it do for
my purposes of studying material that will still be relevant in 8.0?


You're correct - .NET 2002 is VC7. For studying native C++, VC7.1 is a much
better choice in my opinion due to significantly increased standards
conformance. If you're limiting your native C++ to MFC and ATL applications
(which don't typically make use of some of the more advanced features of the
C++ language), then you'll be fine with VC7 until Whidbey comes along.

-cd

Nov 17 '05 #8

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

2 posts views Thread by jeevanand | last post: by
13 posts views Thread by Todd Bandrowsky | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by ultranet | last post: by
17 posts views Thread by Michael | last post: by
5 posts views Thread by Patrick Olurotimi Ige | last post: by
53 posts views Thread by Edward Diener | last post: by
reply views Thread by leo001 | last post: by

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.