About C++ IDEs

[LifeStory via DotNetMonster.com]

Hi all,

I am now using C++ for operations research techniques implementations to get
numerical reults, I have a question what is the difference between VC++.Net,
VC++ 6.0 (in terms of performance)? and which one is better to be used? and
related to IDEs is it better to use Visual Studio 6.0 or Visual Studio .Net
2005? and what are the restrictions on using both of them?

Thank you.

nana

--
Message posted via http://www.dotnetmonster.com

[David Lowndes]

>I am now using C++ for operations research techniques implementations to get

>numerical reults, I have a question what is the difference between VC++.Net,
VC++ 6.0 (in terms of performance)? and which one is better to be used? and
related to IDEs is it better to use Visual Studio 6.0 or Visual Studio .Net
2005? and what are the restrictions on using both of them?

VC6 is much lighter weight IDE than VS2005, but having said that
either should work well on a reasonably modern PC.

VC6 is no longer maintained and its compiler won't cope with more
complex C++. The C++ compiler in VS2005 is considerably better in
conformance to the language.

If your C++ code will be using templates, I'd recommend you use the
latest version, otherwise either would probably suffice for your
requirements.

Dave

[Eberhard Schefold]

LifeStory via DotNetMonster.com wrote:

I am now using C++ for operations research techniques implementations to get
numerical reults, I have a question what is the difference between VC++.Net,
VC++ 6.0 (in terms of performance)? and which one is better to be used? and
related to IDEs is it better to use Visual Studio 6.0 or Visual Studio .Net
2005? and what are the restrictions on using both of them?

VC6 is 9 (nine) years old. In a fast-evolving technology, I can't
believe that anyone even considers using a compiler/IDE/library that
cannot be anything but hopelessly outdated.

[Herhor]

LifeStory via DotNetMonster.com pisze:

Hi all,

I am now using C++ for operations research techniques implementations to get
numerical reults, I have a question what is the difference between VC++.Net,
VC++ 6.0 (in terms of performance)?

Get Orcas!

[Nathan Mates]

In article <f7**********@news4.fe.internet.bosch.com>,
Eberhard Schefold <eb**@gmx.dewrote:

>VC6 is 9 (nine) years old. In a fast-evolving technology, I can't
believe that anyone even considers using a compiler/IDE/library that
cannot be anything but hopelessly outdated.

The compiler and library may be hopelessly outdated, but the VC6
IDE has one major thing going for it: it doesn't suck in quite the way
the 200x IDE does. VC6's IDE never once crashed on me in Win2000/XP.
VS200x dies on me 2-5 times a week. [2002 was 2-5 times a day,
minimum.] VC6 also supported focus follows mouse just fine, something
that VC5 and 200x have had serious problems with. It is *seriously*
annoying to have such misbehavior. VC6's IDE just feels snappy on
modern systems, while 200x is still a bit sluggish.

I'd seriously consider paying good money to be able to use VS2005's
compiler/library (which is a LOT better) with VC6's IDE (which I still
think is a lot better).

Nathan Mates
--
<*Nathan Mates - personal webpage http://www.visi.com/~nathan/
# Programmer at Pandemic Studios -- http://www.pandemicstudios.com/
# NOT speaking for Pandemic Studios. "Care not what the neighbors
# think. What are the facts, and to how many decimal places?" -R.A. Heinlein

[Michael Viking]

"Eberhard Schefold" <eb**@gmx.dewrote in message
news:f7**********@news4.fe.internet.bosch.com...

LifeStory via DotNetMonster.com wrote:

SNIP

>
VC6 is 9 (nine) years old. In a fast-evolving technology, I can't
believe that anyone even considers using a compiler/IDE/library that
cannot be anything but hopelessly outdated.

And I can't believe anybody would upgrade, upgrade, and upgrade, and
upgrade...and upgrade some more.

What I recall was that 9 years ago people were able to develop operating
systems, office applications, email systems, IDEs, compilers, hmm, what else
did MS produce with their C++ tools and VC6 seemed to work fine for the
task. From what I understand, their latest operating system, office
applications, email systems, database systems, IDEs, compilers, etc. are
still in C++. It was good enough then, it's good enough now. If you don't
need the super latest standards-compliant C++ (and I argue that few honestly
do - and those that do, should), why upgrade?

We still use VC6 because the compiler works fine for us and the IDE rocks.

-Michael Viking

[David Wilkinson]

Nathan Mates wrote:

I'd seriously consider paying good money to be able to use VS2005's
compiler/library (which is a LOT better) with VC6's IDE (which I still
think is a lot better).

Nathan Mates

Have you looked at the Intel compiler? It claims to be plug-in
compatible with VC6.

--
David Wilkinson
Visual C++ MVP

[David Wilkinson]

Michael Viking wrote:

And I can't believe anybody would upgrade, upgrade, and upgrade, and
upgrade...and upgrade some more.

What I recall was that 9 years ago people were able to develop operating
systems, office applications, email systems, IDEs, compilers, hmm, what else
did MS produce with their C++ tools and VC6 seemed to work fine for the
task. From what I understand, their latest operating system, office
applications, email systems, database systems, IDEs, compilers, etc. are
still in C++. It was good enough then, it's good enough now. If you don't
need the super latest standards-compliant C++ (and I argue that few honestly
do - and those that do, should), why upgrade?

We still use VC6 because the compiler works fine for us and the IDE rocks.

Michael:

Basically, I agree with you. But for me, the most important reason to
move to away from VC6 (which I have not yet done for my MFC projects) is
that PSDK's after Feb 2003 cannot be used with it.

--
David Wilkinson
Visual C++ MVP

[Nathan Mates]

In article <Og*************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>,
David Wilkinson <no******@effisols.comwrote:

> I'd seriously consider paying good money to be able to use VS2005's
compiler/library (which is a LOT better) with VC6's IDE (which I still
think is a lot better).

>Have you looked at the Intel compiler? It claims to be plug-in
compatible with VC6.

It's harder to do so at work. I doubt the Intel compiler can kick
out Xenon (== XBox 360) code; MS ties their development tools together
at the hip. Plus, when the rest of the team uses 2005, keeping the
..dsp & .vcproj files in sync could get really annoying. When you're on
a team, certain customizations are easy. Some aren't.

Frankly, if they fixed my few royal annoyances with 2005-- e.g. not
supporting focus-follows-mouse, and the 'always step into disassembly,
even when in 100% source view' bugs, I'd be more willing to give up
any dreams of returning to VC6. I like what the compiler team has done
with 2005, and the secure functions (e.g. strcpy_s) are so easy to use
they help out a lot. I just wish the UI/IDE team could show some
results for the effort they put in.

Nathan Mates
--
<*Nathan Mates - personal webpage http://www.visi.com/~nathan/
# Programmer at Pandemic Studios -- http://www.pandemicstudios.com/
# NOT speaking for Pandemic Studios. "Care not what the neighbors
# think. What are the facts, and to how many decimal places?" -R.A. Heinlein

[Eberhard Schefold]

Michael Viking wrote:

What I recall was that 9 years ago people were able to develop operating
systems, office applications, email systems, IDEs, compilers, hmm, what else
did MS produce with their C++ tools and VC6 seemed to work fine for the
task. From what I understand, their latest operating system, office
applications, email systems, database systems, IDEs, compilers, etc. are
still in C++. It was good enough then, it's good enough now.

Not for us, not at all. The VC6 compiler has serious bugs and deviations
from the standard that severely hurt us in the past. Runtime error
checking has greatly improved since then, in many respects. The Standard
C++ library that comes with VC6 is hopelessly outdated and flawed. Any
attempt to use a common library like Boost is in vain.

But I see that we're not even living on the same planet, so I must
respect that.

[Daniel James]

In article news:<eH*************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, David Wilkinson
wrote:

I agree with you. But for me, the most important reason to
move to away from VC6 (which I have not yet done for my MFC projects) is
that PSDK's after Feb 2003 cannot be used with it.

The great advantage of using the Feb 2003 PSDK is that it doesn't support
-- and so you will not inadvertently use -- any of the repulsive GUI-bling
eye-candy monstrosities that MS have chosen to contaminate their OS with
since Win2k.

There are many things wrong with VC6 and the VS98 IDE, but the alarming
thing is the number of things that were right with that IDE that were
subsequently discarded in VS200x.

To echo what others here have said: I would be very happy to be able to use
the C++ compiler from VS2005 in the VS98 IDE.

Cheers,
Daniel.

[Michael Viking]

"Hendrik Schober" <Sp******@gmx.dewrote in message
news:uF**************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

(BTW, while I write most of my code on Windows, 95%
of the code I write nowadays runs on quite a few
platforms. Therefor I write plain and portable std
C++ and almost never use the Win32 API at all --
and thus know very little about it. Your above
statement paints me as not knowing much of anything.)

Based on all your posts I'm quite sure you're very competent. What I say
doesn't paint you as somebody who doesn't know much of anything, it paints
you as somebody we most likely wouldn't hire to work on our applications
since your skill set doesn't fit. And my guess is that you have programmed
in C, and it wouldn't surprise me if you've programmed in Assembler.

Cheers.

-Michael Viking