Thread: Curiosity and caffeine fuel this programmer

The compiler in VS.net is more standards compliant than the compiler in VC++ 6.0. However, reports are that there is no compiler which completely implements the standards. The newer compilers do come closer to that goal than older versions, but alas, are not perfect either. MS compilers are the defacto industry standard, but professional material is produced using all the major, and probably a number of the minor, compilers. Writing standards compliant code with any "compliant" compiler should be the same, though using proprietary libraries like MFC and VCL, which have the bells and whistles a lot of people like to use, will make the code non-compliant.

Well, now we have tread onto the two different standards in programming. There is the ISO standard and then there is the commercial standard. Unfortunately these two do not always travel down the same road.

As such, some may say unfortunately, but for OS application development the majority occurs in Windows and as such Microsoft sets the standard because they are the standard for commercial development.

When you dive into commercial application development you will find yourself more involved with the api for the OS and not so much the ISO standard for the language. This is simply a matter of fact.

Please, this is not a flame post. So don't flame.

what's a flame post?

Just to show you how much I know about proper etiquette...so a flame is when you insult someone? Are you trying to say that ppl on these forums would insult me for asking a quesiton? Or even because the topic is simple? Ahh bah humbug...learning is learning I searched the internet and read a few more of my many books before posting because I couldnt find an answer. I respect the opinion of the people who post on these forums...I've never seen a stupid outburst of obnoxious behavior...only helpful comments and replies.

My bad I corrected my post. I meant to say this is not a flame post, meaning that just because people don't like Microsoft they would throw out a bunch of non facted based crap.

A flame post would be if people came in and started arguing and denouncing peoples opinions.

oh ok...yeah...everyone has a problem with Microsoft hehe...and in all honesty if they dont like Microsoft...they're just a waste of space!! hehe j/k I had to get one cliched joke in before the night's over...I'm sorry you had to be a part of it hehe...I have to say...Andy, you make some interesting comments:

There is the ISO standard and then there is the commercial standard.

It's like the standard becomes the best case scenario but not what's efficiently handled in a work environment...however, imagine a world without the standard...it's always nice to fall back on set parameters, even if they're bent or slightly twisted (hopefully not broken...that's just useless)...

I can sense an important discussion brewing...

VC++ often will refer to Visual C++ 6.0, which is an old version and isn't very standard compliant (And has annoying bugs too). I used to use it though, and it seems to get the job done OK. Modern versions (i.e. the various .NET's) are better for standard compliance, although MSVC 2005 (I think it's still free beta download?) seems to take a step backward by introducing false warnings that say "(xxx function) has been deprecated", for certain library functions that MS has deemed insecure and replaced with their own versions.

Hello,

I'm not sure any compiler can be 100% ISO/ANSI C compliant. The original purpose of the ANSI specification was to establish a narrow definition of the C language, one that could be compiled and run on many different computers and execution environments. It was a grand vision of portability. The ANSI C standard, unlike most standards, does not dictate a minimum level of functionality. Strictly-conforming compilers accept a specific definition of the language.

The ANSI C specifications were first released in 1990, in a document with the formal-sounding name of ANSI X3.159-1989. This standard was also adopted by the International Standards Organization (ISO) as ISO/TEC 9899-1990. Subsequently, the standard was updated, and the latest version is C99, ISO/IEC 9899:1999.

Data typing is application-dependent, not implementation-dependent. The definition of int in the last 15 years attests to this. First it was set as 16 bits, to support the PDP-11 natural word size. Later, it was intended to vary with the natural size of the processor.

In October of 2002, Microsoft had pledged that its next version of Visual Studio .NET will contain an ISO/ANSI-compliant version of Visual C++ .NET. That version of Visual Studio .NET aimed for a score of 90+ compliance with the C++ standard. Hunter2 laid the basis on VC6/VC++ compliance.


- Stack Overflow

> I'm using Visual studio.net
> Also, I'm not a professional programmer
If you are fortunate enough to have access to .net while you are learning, then that's OK for learning C++. Most newbies don't have that kind of $$$ to hand, so the usual recommendation is dev-c++ (you get an IDE and a GNU-GCC compiler).

> they seem unprofessional
They also cost $0 - a biggie for the student on a budget. But that's just the glossy IDE. The compiler (the GNU based ones at least) is just as good as the Microsoft compiler (in standards compliancy), and that's the bit which counts when it comes to learning the language (not whether the IDE allows say italic fonts).

Many newbies learn from the command prompt (using a separate editor for the code). An IDE is just a distraction (and information hider). I don't even bother with the IDE for small simple programs, it's just too bulky.