Hello,
I've a question about the future of the .NET Framework. What will be the
successor of the .NET 2.0 Framework? WinFX? If it will be WinFX, will it be
much different to the .NET 2.0 and will my applications developed for .NET
2.0 also run with the new WinFX?
I heard that Microsoft will support the .NET Framework in the future more
than other MS programming languages (for example MFC C++).
Are the .NET Framework languages are pogramming languages for the future or
will they be forgotten in the next 10 years for example?
25  1401 
Hello DHarry,
D> I've a question about the future of the .NET Framework. What will be
D> the successor of the .NET 2.0 Framework? WinFX? If it will be WinFX,
D> will it be much different to the .NET 2.0 and will my applications
D> developed for .NET 2.0 also run with the new WinFX?
WinFX is a set of technologies, like Avalon, Indigo and etc. It's more library
way ragther that framework.
..NET 2.0 gives them a base.
You apps don't depend on WinFX, winFX just gives u new features.
D> I heard that Microsoft will support the .NET Framework in the future
D> more
D> than other MS programming languages (for example MFC C++).
Everything depends on what are u writing. For now C++/COM has power functionality
even to work with .NET, especially with CLR.
C++/COM will live long, but there is nothing to develop more.
..NET simplify you work and it's not perfect, a lot of things need to be developed
more and more
D> Are the .NET Framework languages are pogramming languages for the
D> future or
D> will they be forgotten in the next 10 years for example?
What do u worry about?
---
WBR,
Michael Nemtsev :: blog: http://spaces.msn.com/laflour
"At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not
cease to be insipid." (c) Friedrich Nietzsche
DHarry,
WinFX runs on .NET 2.0, so if MS continues to support WinFX, MS will
continue to support .NET. Also, MS continues to support MFC, even
though it's now the red-headed stepchild to .NET.
Will .NET go away? I doubt it. As evidence, I offer the following.
Have you ever heard of singularity? Check it out: http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/
That's right... Microsoft tried to write an OS in .NET, and from what
I've read, did a fairly decent job of it. .NET isn't going away anytime
soon -- although I wish the name would.
I never heard from Singularity before... but wow... it gives me a new opinion
about .NET.
I often read and heard that Microsoft said that ".NET is the future" and
that's the reason I opened this thread.
I never heard before that MS wrote an application in .NET (excluding
"Singularity") But why? Because of security or reverse engeneering? For
example why is MS Office not written in .NET?!
Ok... Singularity... it's a research project, and depending on my knownledge
about the strategies of Microsoft, I don't believe that MS will release
anytime (to unsecure, reverse engeneering, ...)
(...)
The reason I asked for the future of .NET, is that I want to specialise me
on one language for my applications released next.
I'm looking after a secure, new and powerfull language which won't be "out"
in the next years.
Greets from Germany
I believe MS has been writing new applications in .NET -- I believe the
Expression series is written in WinFX, which is based on .NET. However,
they're not about to drop an existing code-base unless they absolutely
have to, so existing applications like Office will remain in C/C++ for
a while.
MSOffice is likely quite a big application and I doubt it would be easy to
rewrite the whole thing in .NET just to be at the same point. Also despite
Singularity (which doesn't use .NET as we know it) .NET is an application
Framework i.e. it would likely make much more sense to write a end user such
as a CRM toll using .NET rather than a DB toll. MSOffice likely lies in
between.
--
"DHarry" <DH****@discussions.microsoft.com> a écrit dans le message de news: 01**********************************@microsoft.com... I never heard from Singularity before... but wow... it gives me a new
opinion
about .NET.
I often read and heard that Microsoft said that ".NET is the future" and
that's the reason I opened this thread.
I never heard before that MS wrote an application in .NET (excluding
"Singularity") But why? Because of security or reverse engeneering? For
example why is MS Office not written in .NET?!
Ok... Singularity... it's a research project, and depending on my
knownledge
about the strategies of Microsoft, I don't believe that MS will release
anytime (to unsecure, reverse engeneering, ...)
(...)
The reason I asked for the future of .NET, is that I want to specialise me
on one language for my applications released next.
I'm looking after a secure, new and powerfull language which won't be
"out"
in the next years.
Greets from Germany
Looks like I insist on "tools" being tolls...
--
"Patrice" <sc****@chez.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
OF**************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... MSOffice is likely quite a big application and I doubt it would be easy to
rewrite the whole thing in .NET just to be at the same point. Also despite
Singularity (which doesn't use .NET as we know it) .NET is an application
Framework i.e. it would likely make much more sense to write a end user
such as a CRM toll using .NET rather than a DB toll. MSOffice likely lies
in between.
--
"DHarry" <DH****@discussions.microsoft.com> a écrit dans le message de
news: 01**********************************@microsoft.com...I never heard from Singularity before... but wow... it gives me a new
opinion
about .NET.
I often read and heard that Microsoft said that ".NET is the future" and
that's the reason I opened this thread.
I never heard before that MS wrote an application in .NET (excluding
"Singularity") But why? Because of security or reverse engeneering? For
example why is MS Office not written in .NET?!
Ok... Singularity... it's a research project, and depending on my
knownledge
about the strategies of Microsoft, I don't believe that MS will release
anytime (to unsecure, reverse engeneering, ...)
(...)
The reason I asked for the future of .NET, is that I want to specialise
me
on one language for my applications released next.
I'm looking after a secure, new and powerfull language which won't be
"out"
in the next years.
Greets from Germany
After putting all of the VB6 programmers through the move to VB.NET, I think
it is safe to say that it will be quite a while until another major move is
made.
The fact that you still have atleast two more full studio/framework
iterations works out well too :)
My main worry would be about languages such as F# becoming more standard.
Cheers,
Greg
"DHarry" <DH****@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:01**********************************@microsof t.com... I never heard from Singularity before... but wow... it gives me a new
opinion
about .NET.
I often read and heard that Microsoft said that ".NET is the future" and
that's the reason I opened this thread.
I never heard before that MS wrote an application in .NET (excluding
"Singularity") But why? Because of security or reverse engeneering? For
example why is MS Office not written in .NET?!
Ok... Singularity... it's a research project, and depending on my
knownledge
about the strategies of Microsoft, I don't believe that MS will release
anytime (to unsecure, reverse engeneering, ...)
(...)
The reason I asked for the future of .NET, is that I want to specialise me
on one language for my applications released next.
I'm looking after a secure, new and powerfull language which won't be
"out"
in the next years.
Greets from Germany
>Looks like I insist on "tools" being tolls...
At least you were consistent. :)
My error! I didn't know F# until now :-)
Until the Visual Studio IDE is written in .NET, I wouldn't call either MFC
or COM redheaded stepchilds. The VS IDE is one huge COM application.
--
-C. Moya www.cmoya.com
"Randolpho" <ra*******@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@i39g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com... DHarry,
WinFX runs on .NET 2.0, so if MS continues to support WinFX, MS will
continue to support .NET. Also, MS continues to support MFC, even
though it's now the red-headed stepchild to .NET.
Will .NET go away? I doubt it. As evidence, I offer the following.
Have you ever heard of singularity? Check it out:
http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/
That's right... Microsoft tried to write an OS in .NET, and from what
I've read, did a fairly decent job of it. .NET isn't going away anytime
soon -- although I wish the name would.
>Until the Visual Studio IDE is written in .NET, I wouldn't call either MFC or COM redheaded stepchilds. The VS IDE is one huge COM application.
MFC isn't about to go away, as I mentioned in the same sentence that I
called it a "redheaded stepchild", but I meant "redheaded stepchild" in
the .NET gets all the buzz while MFC is quietly pushed to the sidelines
way. At Visual Studio Connections, for example, there wasn't a single
MFC class available.
Of course... MFC *is* ugly and uber-hideous to look at, so I could have
meant it in the "traditional" way. :)
I agree... but though, again, I'm a fan of .NET..... that the IDE itself is
*not* written in .NET I think speaks volumes. I think it's a shame. I don't
expect heavy duty services like SQL Server or IIS to all of a sudden be
written in .NET (that's just stupid)... but the Visual Studio .NET IDE???
Come on... that's just sad.
Just spend a little time in the DTE Macro environment trying to automate the
IDE and you'll soon stumble on all the COM quirks and weird window names and
just plain archaic GUI infrastructure designs that have plagued MS since
Windows 95.
--
-C. Moya www.cmoya.com
"Randolpho" <ra*******@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com... Until the Visual Studio IDE is written in .NET, I wouldn't call either
MFC
or COM redheaded stepchilds. The VS IDE is one huge COM application.
MFC isn't about to go away, as I mentioned in the same sentence that I
called it a "redheaded stepchild", but I meant "redheaded stepchild" in
the .NET gets all the buzz while MFC is quietly pushed to the sidelines
way. At Visual Studio Connections, for example, there wasn't a single
MFC class available.
Of course... MFC *is* ugly and uber-hideous to look at, so I could have
meant it in the "traditional" way. :)
I always thought that VS.NET IDE is writtin in .NET.
"CMM" <cm*@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... I agree... but though, again, I'm a fan of .NET..... that the IDE itself is
*not* written in .NET I think speaks volumes. I think it's a shame. I don't
expect heavy duty services like SQL Server or IIS to all of a sudden be
written in .NET (that's just stupid)... but the Visual Studio .NET IDE???
Come on... that's just sad.
Just spend a little time in the DTE Macro environment trying to automate
the IDE and you'll soon stumble on all the COM quirks and weird window
names and just plain archaic GUI infrastructure designs that have plagued
MS since Windows 95.
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
"Randolpho" <ra*******@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com... >Until the Visual Studio IDE is written in .NET, I wouldn't call either
>MFC
or COM redheaded stepchilds. The VS IDE is one huge COM application.
MFC isn't about to go away, as I mentioned in the same sentence that I
called it a "redheaded stepchild", but I meant "redheaded stepchild" in
the .NET gets all the buzz while MFC is quietly pushed to the sidelines
way. At Visual Studio Connections, for example, there wasn't a single
MFC class available.
Of course... MFC *is* ugly and uber-hideous to look at, so I could have
meant it in the "traditional" way. :)
Nope. AFAIK, its main component MSENV.DLL is completely unmanaged code...
its a big a big COM app.... its toolbars are MS Office commandbars (not .NET
by any means) and all its windows are non-.NET non-"Windows Forms"...
possibly with the exception of the Properties toolbox... which is not a .NET
window itself but does contain a .NET control (the reusable Property
Editor).
--
-C. Moya www.cmoya.com
"Mike Grace" <no**************@xxx.xxx> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... I always thought that VS.NET IDE is writtin in .NET.
"CMM" <cm*@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...I agree... but though, again, I'm a fan of .NET..... that the IDE itself
is *not* written in .NET I think speaks volumes. I think it's a shame. I
don't expect heavy duty services like SQL Server or IIS to all of a sudden
be written in .NET (that's just stupid)... but the Visual Studio .NET
IDE??? Come on... that's just sad.
Just spend a little time in the DTE Macro environment trying to automate
the IDE and you'll soon stumble on all the COM quirks and weird window
names and just plain archaic GUI infrastructure designs that have plagued
MS since Windows 95.
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
"Randolpho" <ra*******@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com... >Until the Visual Studio IDE is written in .NET, I wouldn't call either
>MFC
or COM redheaded stepchilds. The VS IDE is one huge COM application.
MFC isn't about to go away, as I mentioned in the same sentence that I
called it a "redheaded stepchild", but I meant "redheaded stepchild" in
the .NET gets all the buzz while MFC is quietly pushed to the sidelines
way. At Visual Studio Connections, for example, there wasn't a single
MFC class available.
Of course... MFC *is* ugly and uber-hideous to look at, so I could have
meant it in the "traditional" way. :)
>that the IDE itself is *not* written in .NET I think speaks volumes. I think it's a shame.
Actually, a lot of the IDE *is* written in .NET, but not all of it.
Microsoft has a ton of legacy code from Visual C++ that they'd like to
leverage (forgive the buzzword, please, it actually fits in this case);
you can't expect them to throw it away entirely, can you?
If you want a .NET IDE written *entirely* in .NET, check out
SharpDevelop: http://icsharpcode.net/
What does "a lot" mean? I don't think the huge 8 megabyte MSENV.dll is a
managed assembly (is it?). Some wizards and peripheral stuff doesn't mean
Visual Studio is written in .NET....
.... even if it it's written in Visual C++ ".NET" (which as of VS 2003, it
was not.... not sure about 2005) that doesn't mean that it's actually
"managed" and uses *Windows Forms.* It does NOT.
I could be wrong... but I've seen no evidence that the Visual Studio IDE is
nothing but a Classic fat COM application. Even in the macro evironment,
when you try to start automating the Visual Studio IDE, the IDE windows have
names like VS_COM_Window (or something like that).... that for sure is not a
good sign.
--
-C. Moya www.cmoya.com
"Randolpho" <ra*******@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11*********************@g10g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com... that the IDE itself is *not* written in .NET I think
speaks volumes. I think it's a shame.
Actually, a lot of the IDE *is* written in .NET, but not all of it.
Microsoft has a ton of legacy code from Visual C++ that they'd like to
leverage (forgive the buzzword, please, it actually fits in this case);
you can't expect them to throw it away entirely, can you?
If you want a .NET IDE written *entirely* in .NET, check out
SharpDevelop:
http://icsharpcode.net/
Also, to add.... Microsoft has a ton of legacy code... that they'd like to
leverage....you can't expect them to throw it away entirely, can you?
Yet, we don't have 10,000 developers at my company, but WE'RE expected to
throw it away? No, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. The
..NET *IDE* should be 100% managed IMO.... until then .NET is NOT a "real"
platform in my book (as much as I love it).
P.S. I do love .NET.
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
"CMM" <cm*@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:uh*************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... What does "a lot" mean? I don't think the huge 8 megabyte MSENV.dll is a
managed assembly (is it?). Some wizards and peripheral stuff doesn't mean
Visual Studio is written in .NET....
... even if it it's written in Visual C++ ".NET" (which as of VS 2003, it
was not.... not sure about 2005) that doesn't mean that it's actually
"managed" and uses *Windows Forms.* It does NOT.
I could be wrong... but I've seen no evidence that the Visual Studio IDE
is nothing but a Classic fat COM application. Even in the macro
evironment, when you try to start automating the Visual Studio IDE, the
IDE windows have names like VS_COM_Window (or something like that)....
that for sure is not a good sign.
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
"Randolpho" <ra*******@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11*********************@g10g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com... >that the IDE itself is *not* written in .NET I think
speaks volumes. I think it's a shame.
Actually, a lot of the IDE *is* written in .NET, but not all of it.
Microsoft has a ton of legacy code from Visual C++ that they'd like to
leverage (forgive the buzzword, please, it actually fits in this case);
you can't expect them to throw it away entirely, can you?
If you want a .NET IDE written *entirely* in .NET, check out
SharpDevelop:
http://icsharpcode.net/
Singularity is written mostly with C#. I believe that makes it written in
..NET.
--
Christopher A. Reed
"The oxen are slow, but the earth is patient."
"Patrice" <sc****@chez.com> wrote in message
news:OF**************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... MSOffice is likely quite a big application and I doubt it would be easy to
rewrite the whole thing in .NET just to be at the same point. Also despite
Singularity (which doesn't use .NET as we know it) .NET is an application
Framework i.e. it would likely make much more sense to write a end user
such as a CRM toll using .NET rather than a DB toll. MSOffice likely lies
in between.
According to "An Overview of the Singularity Project" at http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity, it is actually written using
Sing# (a language derived from a language that is derived from C#).
A recent MSDN Magazine articles says it is written using C# but it looks
like a simplification...
--
Patrice
"Christopher Reed" <ca****@nospam.nospam> a écrit dans le message de news: u1**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... Singularity is written mostly with C#. I believe that makes it written in
.NET.
--
Christopher A. Reed
"The oxen are slow, but the earth is patient."
"Patrice" <sc****@chez.com> wrote in message
news:OF**************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... MSOffice is likely quite a big application and I doubt it would be easy
to rewrite the whole thing in .NET just to be at the same point. Also
despite Singularity (which doesn't use .NET as we know it) .NET is an
application Framework i.e. it would likely make much more sense to write
a end user such as a CRM toll using .NET rather than a DB toll. MSOffice
likely lies in between.
But it's still .NET, which was my counterpoint....
--
Christopher A. Reed
"The oxen are slow, but the earth is patient."
"Patrice" <sc****@chez.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... According to "An Overview of the Singularity Project" at
http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity, it is actually written using
Sing# (a language derived from a language that is derived from C#).
A recent MSDN Magazine articles says it is written using C# but it looks
like a simplification...
--
Patrice
"Christopher Reed" <ca****@nospam.nospam> a écrit dans le message de news:
u1**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... Singularity is written mostly with C#. I believe that makes it written
in .NET.
--
Christopher A. Reed
"The oxen are slow, but the earth is patient."
"Patrice" <sc****@chez.com> wrote in message
news:OF**************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... MSOffice is likely quite a big application and I doubt it would be easy
to rewrite the whole thing in .NET just to be at the same point. Also
despite Singularity (which doesn't use .NET as we know it) .NET is an
application Framework i.e. it would likely make much more sense to write
a end user such as a CRM toll using .NET rather than a DB toll. MSOffice
likely lies in between.
CMM opined: Yet, we don't have 10,000 developers at my company, but WE'RE expected to
throw it away? No, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. The
.NET *IDE* should be 100% managed IMO.... until then .NET is NOT a "real"
platform in my book (as much as I love it).
Of course you're not expected to throw away your legacy code!!!! Why do
you think Microsoft goes to so much trouble to ensure that .NET can
interoperate with legacy code? So you *don't* have to throw away your
old stuff! .NET is for new applications, modifications, and upgrades.
Win32 *still* exists, and will continue to do so in some form or other
for many years. Ditto MFC. Unfortunately.... ;)
Patrice opined:According to "An Overview of the Singularity Project" at
http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity, it is actually written using
Sing# (a language derived from a language that is derived from C#).
A recent MSDN Magazine articles says it is written using C# but it looks
like a simplification...
Yes, it's written in Sing#, and did you notice what Sing# added to C#?
Syntactic sugar to embed asynchronous message passing into the
language. That's pretty much it -- other than the contract stuff, Sing#
looks like C#. It's true that Singularity probably doesn't use much of
the API associated with the .NET framework, since it's all kernel code,
but it *does* compile to the same MSIL to which every other .NET
language compiles. It uses properties, attributes, delegates... it is
100% .NET.
Well, ok, it's 99.9% .NET, since there's some unsafe C++ and ASM code
in there, but you get the point, I hope.
I don't kown what exactly it adds (the paper mentions "low level constructs"
but my guess would be it's a bit more than just syntactic suggar but likely
"real" additional low level features aimed at writing something like an
OS)..
That said I prettry agreee that it doesn't really matter. Whatever the
distance between the current framework and what they used is, the whole
project is likely an interesting clue anyway...
--
Patrice
"Randolpho" <ra*******@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news: 11**********************@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups. com... CMM opined:Yet, we don't have 10,000 developers at my company, but WE'RE expected to
throw it away? No, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. The
.NET *IDE* should be 100% managed IMO.... until then .NET is NOT a "real"
platform in my book (as much as I love it).
Of course you're not expected to throw away your legacy code!!!! Why do
you think Microsoft goes to so much trouble to ensure that .NET can
interoperate with legacy code? So you *don't* have to throw away your
old stuff! .NET is for new applications, modifications, and upgrades.
Win32 *still* exists, and will continue to do so in some form or other
for many years. Ditto MFC. Unfortunately.... ;)
Patrice opined:According to "An Overview of the Singularity Project" at
http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity, it is actually written using
Sing# (a language derived from a language that is derived from C#).
A recent MSDN Magazine articles says it is written using C# but it looks
like a simplification...
Yes, it's written in Sing#, and did you notice what Sing# added to C#?
Syntactic sugar to embed asynchronous message passing into the
language. That's pretty much it -- other than the contract stuff, Sing#
looks like C#. It's true that Singularity probably doesn't use much of
the API associated with the .NET framework, since it's all kernel code,
but it *does* compile to the same MSIL to which every other .NET
language compiles. It uses properties, attributes, delegates... it is
100% .NET.
Well, ok, it's 99.9% .NET, since there's some unsafe C++ and ASM code
in there, but you get the point, I hope.
>I don't kown what exactly it adds (the paper mentions "low level constructs" but my guess would be it's a bit more than just syntactic suggar but likely
"real" additional low level features aimed at writing something like an
OS)..
Whoops, you're right. Sing# adds also adds "low-level constructs
necessary for system code", whatever that means. It can't mean
pointers, since that's available in C#. Perhaps it's embedded ASM or
ILASM.
They don't show any Sing# code other than the syntactic sugar for
messaging I mentioned, which is probably why I forgot about it. This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: David Eng |
last post by:
> For many years now enterprise business application development has
> been the core area for the use of C++.
> Today a significant share to this segment has already been lost to
> SUN's Java...
|
by: GTO |
last post by:
I do not believe that C# is the future of C++. I also do not believe that
adding two thousand new library functions to the standard library is the
future of C++. But what is the future of C++? Is...
|
by: Lyle Fairfield |
last post by:
It's confusing. Many people here and elsewhere make many different
predictions:
There's an introduction mentioning some aspects of this at...
|
by: |
last post by:
Everything seems to be moving to .NET and VC++ seems to be adding a lot of
managed code support every new release.
The questions: is unmanaged code in VC++ beeing phased out in favour of
managed...
|
by: Fuzzyman |
last post by:
Hello all,
The following is a copy of a blog entry. It's asking a question about
future statements and the built in compile function. I'd appreciate any
pointers or comments about possible...
|
by: Zootal |
last post by:
My apologies if this gets asked/discussed a lot. With c# rampaging through
corporate USA (and other countries), what impact will this have on the usage
and future of c++? I've used both of them a...
|
by: rohayre |
last post by:
Im a long time java developer and actually have never done anything
with java scripting. I'd like to write a short simple script for
calculating a date in the future based on today's date and a...
|
by: blangela |
last post by:
If you had asked me 5 years ago about the future of C++, I would have
told you that its future was assured for many years to come. Recently,
I have been starting to wonder.
I have been teaching...
|
by: KimmoA |
last post by:
Does C have a future? I'd like to think so, but nobody seems to agree
with me. Of course, I don't use C in my profession, and maybe I
wouldn't be using it if I had the pressure to actually produce...
|
by: Jon Harrop |
last post by:
If Microsoft turn F# into a product and place it alongside C# and VB, will
many people migrate from C# to F#?
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
|
by: emmanuelkatto |
last post by:
Hi All, I am Emmanuel katto from Uganda. I want to ask what challenges you've faced while migrating a website to cloud.
Please let me know.
Thanks!
Emmanuel
|
by: Sonnysonu |
last post by:
This is the data of csv file
1 2 3
1 2 3
1 2 3
1 2 3
2 3
2 3
3
the lengths should be different i have to store the data by column-wise with in the specific length.
suppose the i have to...
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However,...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers,...
|
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing,...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new...
| |
