Fairly named "Standard C++" instead biased ads "unmanged C++" ?
-
MS's advertising is biased, so called "managed C++" or C# is only better to develop for .Net platform only, especially C# is Not a better C++, it just another programming language, if C# is so good, why not MS just develop SQL server, IE or MSOffice in pure C# ?!! Standard C++ is powerful, through "resources acquisition in initialization" it's much safe and simple then so-called "managed C++". by the way, "managed C++" should be called "Unstandard C++"!! .Net is good, because MS will force it become build-in framework of every devices he could or will conquer. Advertising is good, but should not biased. Please let's call "Standard C++" instead biased ads like "unmanaged C++" Could editers of codeproject.com fairly change the title of "managed C++" to "MS managed C++" or ".Net managed C++" or "unstandard C++" ?
-
MS's advertising is biased, so called "managed C++" or C# is only better to develop for .Net platform only, especially C# is Not a better C++, it just another programming language, if C# is so good, why not MS just develop SQL server, IE or MSOffice in pure C# ?!! Standard C++ is powerful, through "resources acquisition in initialization" it's much safe and simple then so-called "managed C++". by the way, "managed C++" should be called "Unstandard C++"!! .Net is good, because MS will force it become build-in framework of every devices he could or will conquer. Advertising is good, but should not biased. Please let's call "Standard C++" instead biased ads like "unmanaged C++" Could editers of codeproject.com fairly change the title of "managed C++" to "MS managed C++" or ".Net managed C++" or "unstandard C++" ?
I understand, and to a degree sympathise with you. Here is something that may help._**
Developers that like shiny objects also dig case mods and scratch-and-sniff stickers.
**_
Klaus Probst, The Lounge
-
MS's advertising is biased, so called "managed C++" or C# is only better to develop for .Net platform only, especially C# is Not a better C++, it just another programming language, if C# is so good, why not MS just develop SQL server, IE or MSOffice in pure C# ?!! Standard C++ is powerful, through "resources acquisition in initialization" it's much safe and simple then so-called "managed C++". by the way, "managed C++" should be called "Unstandard C++"!! .Net is good, because MS will force it become build-in framework of every devices he could or will conquer. Advertising is good, but should not biased. Please let's call "Standard C++" instead biased ads like "unmanaged C++" Could editers of codeproject.com fairly change the title of "managed C++" to "MS managed C++" or ".Net managed C++" or "unstandard C++" ?
James H wrote: if C# is so good, why not MS just develop SQL server, IE or MSOffice in pure C# ?!! Because the language was just created. For porting projects managed C++ is the recommended way of porting old C++ code. For what its worth a large portion of Visual Studio.NET (if not all of it) was created with C# as were the .NET class libraries. James H wrote: Could editers of codeproject.com fairly change the title of "managed C++" to "MS managed C++" or ".Net managed C++" or "unstandard C++" ? Why? managed C++ doesn't need MS nor .NET prefixed to it; by definition managed C++ is MS and .NET and unstandard. James Sonork: Hasaki "I left there in the morning with their God tucked underneath my arm their half-assed smiles and the book of rules. So I asked this God a question and by way of firm reply, He said - I'm not the kind you have to wind up on Sundays." "Wind Up" from Aqualung, Jethro Tull 1971
-
James H wrote: if C# is so good, why not MS just develop SQL server, IE or MSOffice in pure C# ?!! Because the language was just created. For porting projects managed C++ is the recommended way of porting old C++ code. For what its worth a large portion of Visual Studio.NET (if not all of it) was created with C# as were the .NET class libraries. James H wrote: Could editers of codeproject.com fairly change the title of "managed C++" to "MS managed C++" or ".Net managed C++" or "unstandard C++" ? Why? managed C++ doesn't need MS nor .NET prefixed to it; by definition managed C++ is MS and .NET and unstandard. James Sonork: Hasaki "I left there in the morning with their God tucked underneath my arm their half-assed smiles and the book of rules. So I asked this God a question and by way of firm reply, He said - I'm not the kind you have to wind up on Sundays." "Wind Up" from Aqualung, Jethro Tull 1971
James T worte: >Because the language was just created. For porting projects >managed C++ is the recommended way of porting old C++ code. >For what its worth a large portion of Visual Studio.NET (if >not all of it) was created with C# as were the .NET class >libraries. Do you know how much portion? maybe it just the connection with C# or .Net parts use "managed C++" code. .NET class is surely written in C#, will you tell me one day MS will write CLR ( or SQL server, etc) in C#, or 99% MAJORITY in "managed C++" not just for the connection parts with C# or .Net? James T wrote: >Why? managed C++ doesn't need MS nor .NET prefixed to it; by >definition managed C++ is MS and .NET and unstandard. A restaurant could fairly say that "good restrant" is my restaurant, not need to say "foobar good restaurant", implied that other restrant is "not good restrant" ? What we dicuss is not .Net or C# is better than standard C++ , for they have different usage or purpose. Please, focus on the point of "fairly and not bias" advertising. James H
-
James T worte: >Because the language was just created. For porting projects >managed C++ is the recommended way of porting old C++ code. >For what its worth a large portion of Visual Studio.NET (if >not all of it) was created with C# as were the .NET class >libraries. Do you know how much portion? maybe it just the connection with C# or .Net parts use "managed C++" code. .NET class is surely written in C#, will you tell me one day MS will write CLR ( or SQL server, etc) in C#, or 99% MAJORITY in "managed C++" not just for the connection parts with C# or .Net? James T wrote: >Why? managed C++ doesn't need MS nor .NET prefixed to it; by >definition managed C++ is MS and .NET and unstandard. A restaurant could fairly say that "good restrant" is my restaurant, not need to say "foobar good restaurant", implied that other restrant is "not good restrant" ? What we dicuss is not .Net or C# is better than standard C++ , for they have different usage or purpose. Please, focus on the point of "fairly and not bias" advertising. James H
sorry for my poor english, modified: Do you know how much portion? maybe it just use "managed C++" code in the connecting with C# or .Net parts. like a warper. A pretty girl is good looking, not just for what she wearing, but the girl is pretty herself. .NET class is surely written in C#, will you tell me that one day MS will write CLR (not just BCL) 99% MAJORITY in C# or "managed C++", (99% in "managed" parts, like garbage collection... etc)
-
James T worte: >Because the language was just created. For porting projects >managed C++ is the recommended way of porting old C++ code. >For what its worth a large portion of Visual Studio.NET (if >not all of it) was created with C# as were the .NET class >libraries. Do you know how much portion? maybe it just the connection with C# or .Net parts use "managed C++" code. .NET class is surely written in C#, will you tell me one day MS will write CLR ( or SQL server, etc) in C#, or 99% MAJORITY in "managed C++" not just for the connection parts with C# or .Net? James T wrote: >Why? managed C++ doesn't need MS nor .NET prefixed to it; by >definition managed C++ is MS and .NET and unstandard. A restaurant could fairly say that "good restrant" is my restaurant, not need to say "foobar good restaurant", implied that other restrant is "not good restrant" ? What we dicuss is not .Net or C# is better than standard C++ , for they have different usage or purpose. Please, focus on the point of "fairly and not bias" advertising. James H
James H wrote: Do you know how much portion? You can see for yourself, download Anakrino (a .NET decompiler) then open up the class libraries, you will see that for the most part everything is done in .NET, the only parts that aren't written in C#/.NET are those that are wrappers around existing objects, the big one being GDI+. James H wrote: focus on the point of "fairly and not bias" advertising. I don't think you understand what a bias is; because this whole site is bias. The bias of the site is using Microsoft products to produce software solutions for the Microsoft line of Operating Systems and platforms. A bias would also to show favor to one item over another. I don't see the bias in not putting the Microsoft name on Managed C++; it is already understood to NOT be standard, and it is in the .NET section. James H wrote: A restaurant could fairly say that "good restrant" is my restaurant, not need to say "foobar good restaurant", implied that other restrant is "not good restrant" ? :confused: I don't see how this applies to what MC++ should be called. In your example the adjective 'good' has a positive meaning outside of the context, where something that is 'not good' has a negative meaning. In calling managed C++ 'managed C++' you imply that all others are 'unmanaged C++' which is true. Managed and Unmanaged have no conotations of good or bad, it is up to the individual developer or company to apply a meaning to it. James Simplicity Rules!