VS.2005 is it really usable ?
-
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
Have you tried the excellent PowerCollections library from Wintellect?
The last time I checked them (a year and a half ago, maybe) they were still under development. Are they ready now? Anyway, I don't understand why MS didn't come with something like that in the first place instead of the crappy BCL collections.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
The last time I checked them (a year and a half ago, maybe) they were still under development. Are they ready now?
They've been out for ages, i.e., since at least the release date of VS 2005. However, you now have to register at wintellect's site (for free) to get them. They also have a PowerThreading library there but I've not looked at it. I hear that it's good though.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
I don't understand why MS didn't come with something like that in the first place instead of the crappy BCL collections.
I'm sure they'll come up with something like this in the second place!:) Kevin
-
For serious professional C++/MFC (95%) and some C# (5%) ? It seems that I'm reading horrible stories about how bad the product is ( project performances, intellisense, ... ) ! We're mostly upgrading from VC6, I'm using VS.2003 which is working fine. Is it worth it to go to VS.2005? or should we wait and buy VS.2003 ( if that is still possible ) and upgrade later ? Thanks.
Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad
You may have to change your working style a bit if you are working with asp.net since they introduced a different way of working with websites. However, if you go with the new vs2005 website model, you can get some serious productivity gains from not having to recompile the projects as you make small tweaks to the codebehind. It can be really slow when loading the designer view of pages so I would suggest setting the options so that pages load as the source view by default. There is a lot of cool shiny stuff in 2.0 such as generics which are incredibly useful. I personally think it is worth the pain of upgrading your solutions. (Even though it can be a huge PITA!) Timothy Lee Russell http://www.anatone.net
-
For serious professional C++/MFC (95%) and some C# (5%) ? It seems that I'm reading horrible stories about how bad the product is ( project performances, intellisense, ... ) ! We're mostly upgrading from VC6, I'm using VS.2003 which is working fine. Is it worth it to go to VS.2005? or should we wait and buy VS.2003 ( if that is still possible ) and upgrade later ? Thanks.
Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad
We upgraded to VS 2005 and recently down graded back to VS2003 VS2005 is okay on highend systems but next to useless on lowend. Far too slow, too bloated. Also not compatable with net1.1 stuff. FX (Net3) will be out soon so net 2 is really a waste of effort. We are waiting for Vista, Longhorn or Windows 2007, whatever they decide to call it, to actually be released before we again waste money and time upgrading. 70% of development is still done on Visual Studio 6. It works! Good deals can be found for Visual Studio 2003.
-
For serious professional C++/MFC (95%) and some C# (5%) ? It seems that I'm reading horrible stories about how bad the product is ( project performances, intellisense, ... ) ! We're mostly upgrading from VC6, I'm using VS.2003 which is working fine. Is it worth it to go to VS.2005? or should we wait and buy VS.2003 ( if that is still possible ) and upgrade later ? Thanks.
Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad
Any IDE is easier than notepad and the express versions are pretty good value for money if you ask me (I paid A$7k for AutoCAD & use it a lot less than XP). Love it or hate it, M$ is the industry standard. If you don't like it - go out in your garage and invent a better one. You could be the next Bill Gates. For the comparison's sake, Ford, GM etc. make relatively crappy cars but they still sell lots of them simply because they are good value for money (compared to Mercedes etc.) and they meet our minimum requirements. They don't work brilliantly but they work well enough. Ah, it's a nice day outside, I think I'll push my Pinto around the block (because my Explorer is still upsidedown on the motorway). Don't have a cow man
-
For serious professional C++/MFC (95%) and some C# (5%) ? It seems that I'm reading horrible stories about how bad the product is ( project performances, intellisense, ... ) ! We're mostly upgrading from VC6, I'm using VS.2003 which is working fine. Is it worth it to go to VS.2005? or should we wait and buy VS.2003 ( if that is still possible ) and upgrade later ? Thanks.
Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad
i use 2003 for the serious projects cos i'm currently not willing to shell out the cash for 2005. i've been flirting with 2005 Express and i find the speed issue just a little too annoying for my tastes. i'll probably migrate to 2005 eventually after i feel it's worth it for me. then again, they might just surprise us all with VS 2007. it's more a "wait and see" issue for me. ...yeah, i heard you.
-
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
Most SPs have been improvements over whatever was there previously. XP SP1 was better than XP, and XP SP2 is better than XP SP1.
Oh, I get the idea, I love iteration!!! :laugh:
for (i = 2; ; ++i) System.Console.WriteLine ("XP SP" + i + " is better than XP SP" + (i - 1));Anyway, that's de idea of a Service Pack, isn't it! :confused:Gabriel 2 wrote:
Oh, I get the idea, I love iteration!!! for (i = 2; ; ++i) System.Console.WriteLine ("XP SP" + i + " is better than XP SP" + (i - 1));
Unless you have int i = 1; declared or if you have compiler option set for loops :), in VS2005, it should read: for (int i = 2; ; ++i) System.Console.WriteLine ("XP SP" + i + " is better than XP SP" + (i - 1)); I am just mentioning this because we convert our projects from VS2003 and this was a major item for compiling. We used the compiler option :(( Michael ﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠ\|/ ﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠ^O^O^ ——o00o—0—o00o—— If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it? --Albert Einstein
-
Can't speak for c++ but it's totally usable for c#, just a slow IDE is really the only serious problem.
John Cardinal wrote:
Can't speak for c++ but it's totally usable for c#, just a slow IDE is really the only serious problem.
Our PC's had 512MB memory. Our systems would come to a screeching halt whenever we loaded our solution with VS2005. We recently added 2GB memory (total 2.5GB) and now we no longer experience this problem. It actually loads the solution faster than in VS2003. Michael ﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠ\|/ ﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠ^O^O^ ——o00o—0—o00o—— If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it? --Albert Einstein
-
Maximilien wrote:
It seems that I'm reading horrible stories about how bad the product is ( project performances, intellisense, ... ) !
Performance is awful, Intellisense is great (but occasionally slow... back to performance). For me, the improvements to the debugger and editor (especially the ability to jump through the code without having to build browse information) were more than enough to make up for the reduction in speed. YMMV.
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.0.0.0 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
See my previous message: http://www.codeproject.com/lounge.asp?select=1547238&forumid=1159&fr=732.5&df=100&msg=1547238[^] Michael ﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠ\|/ ﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠﾠ^O^O^ ——o00o—0—o00o—— If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it? --Albert Einstein
-
For serious professional C++/MFC (95%) and some C# (5%) ? It seems that I'm reading horrible stories about how bad the product is ( project performances, intellisense, ... ) ! We're mostly upgrading from VC6, I'm using VS.2003 which is working fine. Is it worth it to go to VS.2005? or should we wait and buy VS.2003 ( if that is still possible ) and upgrade later ? Thanks.
Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad
Without the various clarions of Micro$soft suxx, which unimpresses many as better suited for the open-source utopians sequestered at slashdot, the advice would be to install VS 2005. The ambition of many; perhaps not all, coders is to progress; a regression to VS 2003 is not in that path. The only appropriate concern for any company is a loss in revenue and Microsoft certainly understands this. The issues with VS 2005 will be fixed; if not, the market will migrate to another IDE and language.
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
(Although, the compiler isn't all that safe, and may explode in your face, should you use anything fancy)
Yeah, like properly scoped for-loops! X| I've been writing the VS6 specific bits of Visual Lint (i.e. the VSPackage itself, which has to use MFC42) in VS6 and boy is it painful after 3 years of using VS2003 (the automation interface both sucks and blows too). :doh: Anna :rose: Currently working mostly on: Visual Lint :cool: Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work.
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
both sucks and blows too
It should be noted that it does not do so concurrently. It's not that good. :-D
-- 100% natural. No superstitious additives.
-
Without the various clarions of Micro$soft suxx, which unimpresses many as better suited for the open-source utopians sequestered at slashdot, the advice would be to install VS 2005. The ambition of many; perhaps not all, coders is to progress; a regression to VS 2003 is not in that path. The only appropriate concern for any company is a loss in revenue and Microsoft certainly understands this. The issues with VS 2005 will be fixed; if not, the market will migrate to another IDE and language.
Grav-Vt wrote:
the advice would be to install VS 2005. The ambition of many; perhaps not all, coders is to progress; a regression to VS 2003 is not in that path.
You're not a C++ programmer, are you? :suss: The compiler may be sweet, but the IDE sucks for C++ development. Intellisense is always 4 builds behind.. :(
-- 100% natural. No superstitious additives.
-
I'd say go with VS 2005 - expect some IDE speed issues, specially for C++. But the SP will be out by end of this year and hopefully it will all be good then. Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. Also visit the Ultimate Toolbox blog (New)We were using VS2003 for some time, and moved to VS2005 as soon as it was available to us. Yes, there speed of the IDE was frustrating, but overall our productivity has increased. VS2005 and .Net2 are VASTLY better than their earlier versions. (Hope I'm not off topic here, because my experience is limited here to C#, ASP and a bit of VB) :)
-
Don't forget the service pack for VS.Net 2003 - target is June 2006! We're waiting expectantly :) But you know MS... not the most reliable when it comes to deadlines. http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/support/servicing/sp1_vs03/default.aspx mt
-
For serious professional C++/MFC (95%) and some C# (5%) ? It seems that I'm reading horrible stories about how bad the product is ( project performances, intellisense, ... ) ! We're mostly upgrading from VC6, I'm using VS.2003 which is working fine. Is it worth it to go to VS.2005? or should we wait and buy VS.2003 ( if that is still possible ) and upgrade later ? Thanks.
Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad
ummm your mileage may vary. But on a philosophical plane : VS 2005 is a keeper. I have been using MS development environments since... let's see... VB1... (I did C on Windows before that, but there was no "environment") I have used just about everything in between, either occasionally or intensively. There are good products and bad products, the equivalent of Windows 95 and Windows ME respectively. I have just finished two weeks doing C# on VS 2005, and I'm very pleased with it, i.e. it's a quantum leap in productivity. I especially like the Source Safe integration and the deployment aids. Alistair (no quote, no logo)
-
For serious professional C++/MFC (95%) and some C# (5%) ? It seems that I'm reading horrible stories about how bad the product is ( project performances, intellisense, ... ) ! We're mostly upgrading from VC6, I'm using VS.2003 which is working fine. Is it worth it to go to VS.2005? or should we wait and buy VS.2003 ( if that is still possible ) and upgrade later ? Thanks.
Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad
VS2005 is first usable version for writing mixed managed/unmanaged applications. In previous versions, it was possible to write pure .NET applications or pure unmanaged applications. Managed C++ which is supposed to be bridge between managed and unmanaged world, was buggy and unusable. After learning some mixed programming samples written in 2005 version, specifically, Managed Spy++ from MSDN Magazine, I decided to change development platform from MFC to C#, C++/CLI. BTW, I am developing real time applications, so this decision was not trivial. Intellisence problems can be solved with Visual Assist. Standard Microsoft reply to Intellisence problem is "You have some bugs in your code". In any case don't start with 2003 version. 2005 version has new C++/CLI syntax, code written in previous version is complied only with /oldsyntax flag, and generally, should be rewritten.
-
Not for critical appdev it's not, too many hiccups and uncertainties. And much of it's documentation out of date (eg it barely acknowledges NET2.0 and C#2.0), much of it is useless, the english is atrocious, full of split infinitives and sentences ending in prepositions; which results in it being ambiguous and downright misleading at times. I've not used VS for C/C++, I'm still working at the > for that sort of work.