Does VISUAL C++ ruin C?

I was talking to a friend of mine the other day who is a programmer, I myself am a cs student... and I was laughing at the assignments that I was given because I thought they were really easy so I did it all in ANSI C. My friend said he did the same thing to spice it up a bit. Unfortunately the grader had a hard time with my C code so i had to redo it. Back on topic we began talking about visual c++ and visual basic, though the source appears the same you can get by with a lot of it not having a firm grasp on c++. Do you think that visual c++ is ruining the c++ language? Please leave a reason why.

What do you mean? Visual Studio's C++ is (aside from a few corner cases) standard C++.

--
Mats

For the most part Visual C++ now uses standard C++, like matsp stated. There are obviously certain libraries that are not standard for all OS's, but that is the case with any OS.

Shame on your grader for not knowing C well enough.

Shame on both of you for even mentioning Visual Basic. :)

Haha. I appoligize. And im talking about the visual part of it. the whole add form... ill place my text box here, point and click. I agree David with the os specific libraries. But like I said im talking about the visual part of it. I realize that it makes it easier to make gui applications. But mainly my question is on its effect on the language itself.

It does not destroy anything.
C++ does not have anything in its standard for GUI, so technically it cannot destroy anything.
The only "poor" thing is that it is all C. API is in C, and thus the whole forms are plain C.
It would have been better if there was a C++ alternative to the whole GUI thingy in Windows.
But the visual part... it is quite a blessing, if you ask me, and it is a very sad thing that C++ does not have anything GUI-related in its standard.

> It would have been better if there was a C++ alternative to the whole GUI thingy in Windows.
Heard of MFC?

Yes, I have, and no, it is nowhere near good enough.
A lot of times it is just a simple wrapper, but make no mistake - when it comes to GUI, I always use MFC.
But one must remember also that MFC is not free. And I must admit, I was thinking a little more about the API as a whole - all of API in C++ form. Dreams, you know.

Thanks guys!

I thought VS/.NET C++ was managed? In which case that is garbage (excuse the pun) and does ruin C++... but if it's not anymore, when did MS change that? because I'd expect that would have broken a loooot of code.

I think the only way VC++ ruins C are some of the issues me, Elysia with a cameo by laserlight discussed on this thread from post #12 and up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by @nthony

I thought VS/.NET C++ was managed? In which case that is garbage (excuse the pun) and does ruin C++... but if it's not anymore, when did MS change that? because I'd expect that would have broken a loooot of code.

---

Only if you compile it with the /CLR switch to make it C++/CLI code. Otherwise VC++ is perfectly capable of being a standard C++ compiler and IDE.

.NET is managed. But VC++ doesn't have to use the .NET framework.

There are also dialog resources which VS's resource editor can help to make.
They are typically used in Native environments and Windows to visually create dialogs.
MFC works with them, too.
Although in terms of functionality, Windows Forms are way better, yes.

You cannot get by without knowing C++, even when using all of MFC's wizards to their fullest. They simply don't do anything beyond writing some repetitive code.

Quote:

---

Unfortunately the grader had a hard time with my C code so i had to redo it.

---

So the grader is not good enough and that means you have to redo the work?
Or was your code so atrociously unreadable that a normal human cannot be expected to read it?

Where I work they designed a "visual editor" so that people who didn't know how to program could make design the interface to our program. That way, the programmers could program and the designers could design and that would be that. It worked out HORRIBLY.

So I'm prone to think that when they take a powerful language and make it very "visual" that it has the potential to "ruin" the language". But I'm not saying that's necessarily with Visual C++ - I haven't touched that software in YEARS.

I have a feeling it is more of bad communication between the designers and the developers. Designing and implementing are two different things. Many designers would have no idea what things would be a headache for programmers to implement.
I can say however that being able to visually construct my dialogs helps me a million! Imagine sitting there, trying to nudge every control into position by its exact coordinates. Nightmare.

In order for you to have that much communication, they'd need to virtually be programmers - and in any case - all I'm implying is that it creates a huge potential for that to be a problem - I specifically DIDN'T say that it was an inherent drawback.

I just use a text editor, and not once have I ever had to nudge things into place using exact coordinates - I just use fractions of the total width.

I have a feeling you just like hearing yourself talk, being the programming goddess, and all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sean

In order for you to have that much communication, they'd need to virtually be programmers - and in any case - all I'm implying is that it creates a huge potential for that to be a problem - I specifically DIDN'T say that it was an inherent drawback.

---

Well, regardless! Obviously it did not work out well, and whatever the reason behind that may be, I do not know. Poor communication, or misunderstandings was merely a guess from the little information I knew. I also know that big projects tend to get difficult to manage (Windows team).

Quote:

---

I just use a text editor, and not once have I ever had to nudge things into place using exact coordinates - I just use fractions of the total width.

---

Well, I simply suppose different people get along with different approaches.
This simply does not work for me. Visual is my cue, but perhaps not necessarily yours or others...

Quote:

---

I have a feeling you just like hearing yourself talk, being the programming goddess, and all.

---

That is untrue. My signature incorporates only what others have mentioned and is not what I consider myself as, from my view.
Being such a thing would mean you are above all else, but I certainly am not. I have learned a great deal since finding this place and I still do, and thus I respect what others say and absorb that criticism or knowledge.

And as for this debate, I shared only my own experiences with visual designing of forms which I have relied upon heavily and still do when creating GUI applications. It is in no way ruining anything. It works great to me, much more so that if I would have tried to put the controls in there by code. Much faster, much more control, a visual overlook of how things will look, etc.

When it comes to GUI development, C# with WPF is the best thing since sliced bread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidP

When it comes to GUI development, C# with WPF is the best thing since sliced bread.

---

Thats a rather short sighted opinion, and one I do not share. C# fails to provide the performance or security necessary in many applications, for example real time classification of radar imaging, integrating IFF routines, and providing point and click secure connections to individual units. C# is fine for entry level programmers, or projects that dont involve a lot of technical design, but quite frankely, there are far better GUI front ends out there e.g. LabView.

Even sliced bread cannot be used for everything. If you want to make large bread cubes for a themed special dish, sliced bread is unusable. My personal opinions aside, that still doesn't mean that sliced bread isn't absolutely great.

I think C# is mighty fine for GUI front end.

If you need performance then write those items in a C++ dll and call it from C#(Either as COM or P/Invoke).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidP

When it comes to GUI development, C# with WPF is the best thing since sliced bread.

---

I would agree with that one, though. Windows Forms is probably one of the best visual GUI designers I have seen and certainly beats native dialogs.
That is not to say I would like to use it since it is locked to managed languages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by prog-bman

If you need performance then write those items in a C++ dll and call it from C#(Either as COM or P/Invoke).

---

Unfortunately, P/Invoke is limited to calling only C functions. There's no really good way to interop with a C++ library unless you wrap it with C++/CLI. At which point I find it much easier to just write the GUI portion of the application in C++/CLI instead of C#. Just don't let the form designer write your GUI code.

But you could declare those C++ functions as extern "C" at least. It will give you limited compatibility.
But it sucks that you cannot call C++ functions (Microsooooooooooooooooooooooooft!).

You can call C++ functions. You just can't interface with C++ classes unless you wrap them in C++/CLI wrappers.
Oh, and for calling C++ functions, you either need a .def file (which means you can't call overloaded C++ functions) or you need to specify the mangled name in the P/Invoke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidP

When it comes to GUI development, C# with WPF is the best thing since sliced bread.

---

Think of sliced bread. Think now of some really good thick baked bread. Now think of throwing away the sliced bread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CornedBee

You can call C++ functions. You just can't interface with C++ classes unless you wrap them in C++/CLI wrappers.
Oh, and for calling C++ functions, you either need a .def file (which means you can't call overloaded C++ functions) or you need to specify the mangled name in the P/Invoke.

---

So basicalyl C# fails to be ansi compatible. I think I will just stick with using LabView for my GUI front ends.

Quote:

---

Thats a rather short sighted opinion, and one I do not share. C# fails to provide the performance or security necessary in many applications, for example real time classification of radar imaging, integrating IFF routines, and providing point and click secure connections to individual units. C# is fine for entry level programmers, or projects that dont involve a lot of technical design, but quite frankely, there are far better GUI front ends out there e.g. LabView.

---

Short sighted?

WPF allows the use of XAML to create your GUI which is far better than programmatically doing it. Having tried the Windows API and MFC and other GUI libraries in Windows, using WPF by far was the easiest and provided me with the most flexibility. I didn't once say that C# is the high-and-mighty programming language. My personal favorite language has always been C++, but even it is not always the best tool for the job as we all know. No...I just said that using C# and WPF to make a GUI is the best thing since sliced bread, and if you try it you will most definitely believe me.

In terms of LabVIEW. Wow. You design graphical user interfaces in LabVIEW? LabVIEW is a programming language meant for instrument testing and analysis and control. It is indeed very powerful in that regard and has definitely found its use. I have the LabVIEW NI Developer Suite and I use it often, but definitely not for making the sleekest GUI out there.

Well, seeign as how most of the project I work on involve interfacing AI to instrumentation, I guess LabView suits my needs perfectly. I dont realy see what you expect a GUI to do that cant be doe in LabView, so perhaps instead of being vague, you coudl give specific examples.

Quote:

---

So basicalyl C# fails to be ansi compatible.

---

Huh? What incentive does C# have to be compatible with any ANSI standard?

Yes, I strongly beleive that C# ruins C, I learnt C to get away from the horrible .NET framework. Anyway, if Visual C++ uses any part of microsoft's .NET framework it should be condemned for ruining the language.
Also I strongly urge you all to boycott the .NET framework.

C++/CLI has C#, VB.NET, etc uses the dotNet Framework. C++ and C does not.

Quote:

---

Also I strongly urge you all to boycott the .NET framework.

---

That's kind of like telling people to boycott the ACLU. I'm sure there are people that depend on them - but really - what do they care if you're not using their services?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sean

That's kind of like telling people to boycott the ACLU. I'm sure there are people that depend on them - but really - what do they care if you're not using their services?

---

Sean is right. Instead of boycotting one can simply be arrogant towards those who do use it. Just like how one should deal with the ACLU.

"In all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane" - Oscar Wilde

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by P4R4N01D

Yes, I strongly beleive that C# ruins C, I learnt C to get away from the horrible .NET framework. Anyway, if Visual C++ uses any part of microsoft's .NET framework it should be condemned for ruining the language.
Also I strongly urge you all to boycott the .NET framework.

---

I don't use .NET or C# in my daily work. But I've used it a little bit. As somebody who has written a huge amount of code, I don't see what's so bad about it. Other than the fact that it came from Microsoft.

If you are interested in writing only code backed by an international standard, then obviously you won't code in C# or use .NET. If not, I see no reason not to leverage it.