Does Visual Studio Rot the Mind?

This is a discussion on Does Visual Studio Rot the Mind? within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by novocain Most of the people who bag MFC also dislike VB . Damn right. Originally Posted by ...

  1. #16
    C++ Enthusiast jmd15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    532
    Quote Originally Posted by novocain
    Most of the people who bag MFC also dislike VB.
    Damn right.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba
    ..doesn't mean it's useless.
    Never said it was, just said I hated it .
    Trinity: "Neo... nobody has ever done this before."
    Neo: "That's why it's going to work."
    c9915ec6c1f3b876ddf38514adbb94f0

  2. #17
    Dump Truck Internet valis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    357
    If I had to write a backend for an asp website I'd pick C# over VB

  3. #18
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,532
    Quote Originally Posted by valis
    If I had to write a backend for an asp website I'd pick C# over VB
    Why, if VB.Net and C# only difference is the syntax?
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  4. #19
    I am me, who else?
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    250
    Because its the cool thing to use c#

    In any event, as has been echoed in this thread, pretty much any programming language can be good if you put it in the areas it was designed for. No one forces you to use it .

    Besides how can you hate something if you never experienced it? You can dislike something without association, but hating requires a whole new level of experience beyond the mere existential quality of that something.

  5. #20
    C++ Enthusiast jmd15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    532
    Quote Originally Posted by dpro
    Besides how can you hate something if you never experienced it? You can dislike something without association, but hating requires a whole new level of experience beyond the mere existential quality of that something.
    I've used MFC before and I don't like it. Period.
    Trinity: "Neo... nobody has ever done this before."
    Neo: "That's why it's going to work."
    c9915ec6c1f3b876ddf38514adbb94f0

  6. #21
    Super Moderator VirtualAce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9,596
    Based on the information under your logo there I'd say your experience with MFC has been a superficial one. MFC is extremely complex and when used correctly it is extremely powerful. I would venture to say that dev time in MFC as opposed to pure Win32 might be decreased by nearly 60% ...and yet it's still C++ and not VB. What more could a programmer ask for?

    Win32 is not object-oriented but MFC comes very close to making it as OO as can be w/o re-coding the OS. Hopefully all this will change with a new operating system.

  7. #22
    Dump Truck Internet valis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    357
    I find that for the standard controls the api is far faster because you aren't forced into anything--for advanced controls, complex structure (callbacks smash gigantic switch statements) or special stuff like office 2003 menus MFC is obviously faster because that's already setup for you. Still, to throw together a small app which doesn't need extensible I find it much faster to deploy with the flat api.

    As for vb.net being the same as C#, that's not exactly accurate, it's true one has access to the same libraries, but C# exposes more the to programmer and grants greater freedom--it also has more operators (At least since I last worked with vb. Why would a language not have decrement and increment?).

  8. #23
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,532
    Quote Originally Posted by valis
    Why would a language not have decrement and increment?
    Because it's not part of the language specifications?
    The lack (or abundance of features thereof) is not the sole reason why one should choose a tool over another.

    VB and C# have the exact same access to the framework. Sorry to dissapoint you. But they do. They have their own syntax and, as such, may provide different ways to reach certain goals. However, they are the same programming language being given in two flavours.

    VB proved successful, even without decent memory management and with a laughable OOP. Even without the incrememt and decrement operators

    You had for many years a lot of companies making a lot of money providing VB software to their clients (don't argue with me on this please) and a lot of companies gettin their work done supported by VB based tools. My question is thus exactly what you think makes a programming language good or bad?

    What It Offers? or What It Delivers?

    VB.Net is another proof of the success of this language. Here you have a huge base of VB programmers being shifted into a new paradigm while maintaining their know-how.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  9. #24
    C++ Enthusiast jmd15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    532
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba
    Based on the information under your logo there I'd say your experience with MFC has been a superficial one. MFC is extremely complex and when used correctly it is extremely powerful. I would venture to say that dev time in MFC as opposed to pure Win32 might be decreased by nearly 60% ...and yet it's still C++ and not VB. What more could a programmer ask for?

    Win32 is not object-oriented but MFC comes very close to making it as OO as can be w/o re-coding the OS. Hopefully all this will change with a new operating system.
    Oh definitely. I have not had extensive experience with MFC but I've used it and used pure Win32 and Win32 came out in top in my opinion. I know you're big on MFC, but I'm big on Win32 :P. The best part about MFC is how it's more OO than Win32. I still favor Win32 for multiple reasons.
    Trinity: "Neo... nobody has ever done this before."
    Neo: "That's why it's going to work."
    c9915ec6c1f3b876ddf38514adbb94f0

  10. #25
    Disrupting the universe Mad_guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    258
    Whatever you think comes out on top, can't come out on top in all situations. I hope you realize this.
    operating systems: mac os 10.6, debian 5.0, windows 7
    editor: back to emacs because it's more awesomer!!
    version control: git

    website: http://0xff.ath.cx/~as/

  11. #26
    Registered User whiteflags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,751
    That and you always say stuff like
    > I still favor Win32 for multiple reasons.
    but never tell CProg what those reasons are. So you aren't really helping us understand you; it's why Bubba still thinks your minimal experience with MFC affects what you're saying about it.

  12. #27
    C++ Enthusiast jmd15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    532
    Quote Originally Posted by citizen
    That and you always say stuff like
    > I still favor Win32 for multiple reasons.
    but never tell CProg what those reasons are. So you aren't really helping us understand you; it's why Bubba still thinks your minimal experience with MFC affects what you're saying about it.
    Nobody asked for my reasons
    Trinity: "Neo... nobody has ever done this before."
    Neo: "That's why it's going to work."
    c9915ec6c1f3b876ddf38514adbb94f0

  13. #28
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,532
    Well... i am now.
    What's your reasons for favoring Win32 API over MFC?
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  14. #29
    Dump Truck Internet valis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    357
    @Mario F.
    I'm not disagreeing you have access to the framework, you'll see I noted you have access to the same libraries in my post. I just don't like how VB tries to hide details and: access to things like increment, decrement, bitwise operators, dereference, unsafe mode, and it's weakly enforced syntax and cryptic block structure.

    I'm not going to slap my employer if that's how he/she wants it done (that's the only time I've had to use it), I just would still pick C# over VB (for the reasons outlined above).

  15. #30
    I am me, who else?
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    250
    Quote Originally Posted by citizen
    That and you always say stuff like
    > I still favor Win32 for multiple reasons.
    but never tell CProg what those reasons are. So you aren't really helping us understand you; it's why Bubba still thinks your minimal experience with MFC affects what you're saying about it.

    Pretty much

    The whole code bloat is an issue I admit. Perhaps some people feel the "slip-slap-bam" approach of MFC is not right, or complain about the speed of the app under MFC. Perhaps people feel dirty even using classes created by MS, who knows.

    It works quite well when you don't wish to reinvent the wheel.

    If you have used it once or twice, I can understand the initial dislike, as I too hated it for a bit, until I realized how much had been made for it. You can pick and choose what you wish to implement, or not. No one says you need pure MFC all the time. You can mix win32 with it, and no one is the wiser.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Testing some code, lots of errors...
    By Sparrowhawk in forum C Programming
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 12-15-2008, 04:09 AM
  2. Can we have vector of vector?
    By ketu1 in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 01-03-2008, 05:02 AM
  3. C++ std routines
    By siavoshkc in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-28-2006, 01:13 AM
  4. pointer to array of objects of struct
    By undisputed007 in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-02-2004, 04:49 AM
  5. <list>
    By Unregistered in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-24-2002, 04:07 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21