win32...MFC...obsolete?
-
And this[^] is why you shouldn't use XML as (say) a programming language...or any language that people have to write (or read, ideally). It's pretty easy to write parsers for simple little languages (which is what most XML-based applications tend to be) that have a direct mapping to the semantic information in the XML, without requiring all the tag-laden boilerplate. ANTLR[^] is a good place to start - and it's purely a coincidence that the guy who wrote the XML article is the guy who develops Antlr...
Excellent article. Thank you, thank you, thank you. And here I thought I was the only guy left who wasn't enthusiastic about using XML for everything under the sun. But what does this say about those geniuses at Microsoft who came up with XAML?
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
-
deostroll wrote:
Is the win32 platform going obsolete?
For most applications, yes. Microsoft would very much like it to, so yes, it will, though as mentioned, it is still holding on much to MS's dismay.
deostroll wrote:
Is it being replaced by the dotnet framework or something like that?
For many things, for a great majority of business software, absolutely it already has. However, there are other things affecting even dotNet in the near future. Will it be obsoleted too? probably, but maybe not. Will managed languages replace all programming on the planet for all applications, in all environments, in all industries, etc., etc., etc..... No. Nor will everything I do affect dotNet and its environs. That is just life. dotNet, and any successor environment will allways have advantagees in certain environments. Other ways will have the same in thiers. The honest truth is that Microsoft is not trying to please all the people all of the time, nor should anyone expect them to. They are in it for the money (don't fool yourself into thinking they are doing it for your well being). But this is not a bad thing, per se. Improvements in workflow that affect the vast majority of programmers, is what they are there to do. Sometimes they make mistakes, feedback sets them straight. Sometimes they do good, feedback encourages them for more. That is life. I can wave some muscle, and have, to influence a small decision or two. But I don't fool myself into thinking I will ever fully change the MS business model. Do what you can, learn what you can, and move on if you have to. That is life. Some things change, and some things stay the same.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
El Corazon wrote:
For most applications, yes. Microsoft would very much like it to, so yes, it will, though as mentioned, it is still holding on much to MS's dismay.
Do you believe that MS wishes to move toward an operating system that supports ONLY managed applications? An OS where all user-mode code is managed, or else it doesn't run?
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
-
What do you think of this guy's opinion? He is Allen Holub from Holub.com http://www.sdtimes.com/fullcolumn/column-20060901-05.html[^] "XML is perhaps the worst programming language ever conceived. I’m not talking about XML as a data-description language, which was its original design. I’m talking about perverting XML for programming applications. It’s inappropriate to use XML as a scripting language (e.g., ANT), a test-description language (e.g., TestNG), an object-relational mapping language (e.g., Hibernate, JDO), a control-flow language (e.g., JSF), and so forth. These sorts of XML “programs” are unreadable, unmaintainable, an order of magnitude larger than necessary, and audaciously inefficient at runtime."
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
Richie308 wrote:
What do you think of this guy's opinion? He is Allen Holub from Holub.com http://www.sdtimes.com/fullcolumn/column-20060901-05.html\[^\] "XML is perhaps the worst programming language ever conceived. I’m not talking about XML as a data-description language, which was its original design. I’m talking about perverting XML for programming applications. It’s inappropriate to use XML as a scripting language (e.g., ANT), a test-description language (e.g., TestNG), an object-relational mapping language (e.g., Hibernate, JDO), a control-flow language (e.g., JSF), and so forth. These sorts of XML “programs” are unreadable, unmaintainable, an order of magnitude larger than necessary, and audaciously inefficient at runtime."
I'm curious that he doesn't mention XSLT at all since to me that feels very programmery. You're basically using XML to transform an XML document into another XML document, using for looping and branching if else statements/constructs.
Dominic Pettifer Blog: www.dominicpettifer.co.uk
-
deostroll wrote:
Is the win32 platform going obsolete? Is it being replaced by the dotnet framework or something like that?
There's this CPian guy here - I forget his name, from Texas. Fellow was dead against .NET and kept saying garbage collection sucks and all that. Last I heard he's been running around in a mad rush trying to get a .NET job. He's even porting some of his C++ code into C#. That says it for you I think. Now if only I could remember who I am talking about. :rolleyes:
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
Is the win32 platform going obsolete? Is it being replaced by the dotnet framework or something like that?
The way i see it. its all about control. microsoft wants to control what you can do on there OS so yes there more than happy for the standard languages (C, C++, ASM) die out so that there are less people as a threat to there poor coding of the OS. on the other hand .NET is packed full of built in features to make your development time short so that you can get that contact manager or myspace website look alike out of the door. because its RAD to do stuff like that. like with Vista dont touch the Kernel! its badly coded and we dont want you to break anything. cant do that with .Net, its all about empowering more people to code less but make more, so that in the future you wont need to buy software you can have it made for half the price :) unless its from microsoft and is done in c++ with a .net gui. i havent had a c++/mfc project in months, they have been all C#.
-
yes. of course.
image processing toolkits | batch image processing | blogging
Oh God.. I hate .NET :sigh: --PerspX
"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." - Bill Gates
-
The way i see it. its all about control. microsoft wants to control what you can do on there OS so yes there more than happy for the standard languages (C, C++, ASM) die out so that there are less people as a threat to there poor coding of the OS. on the other hand .NET is packed full of built in features to make your development time short so that you can get that contact manager or myspace website look alike out of the door. because its RAD to do stuff like that. like with Vista dont touch the Kernel! its badly coded and we dont want you to break anything. cant do that with .Net, its all about empowering more people to code less but make more, so that in the future you wont need to buy software you can have it made for half the price :) unless its from microsoft and is done in c++ with a .net gui. i havent had a c++/mfc project in months, they have been all C#.
It's all our fault ! :) If We won't use it - it could never be developed :D - Let's get back to asembler and forget about .net :)... about all those forms, ready-to-use controls and components.. ehh. It's hard - isn't it ? I'm also not happy the way it goes - but for now - there is no other option... I think that "The First" software developers had the same feelings when they heard about C language ;)
-
What do you think of this guy's opinion? He is Allen Holub from Holub.com http://www.sdtimes.com/fullcolumn/column-20060901-05.html[^] "XML is perhaps the worst programming language ever conceived. I’m not talking about XML as a data-description language, which was its original design. I’m talking about perverting XML for programming applications. It’s inappropriate to use XML as a scripting language (e.g., ANT), a test-description language (e.g., TestNG), an object-relational mapping language (e.g., Hibernate, JDO), a control-flow language (e.g., JSF), and so forth. These sorts of XML “programs” are unreadable, unmaintainable, an order of magnitude larger than necessary, and audaciously inefficient at runtime."
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
Allen Holub said : XML is perhaps the worst programming language ever conceived. I’m not talking about XML as a data-description language, which was its original design. I’m talking about perverting XML for programming applications. It’s inappropriate to use XML as a scripting language (e.g., ANT), a test-description language (e.g., TestNG), an object-relational mapping language (e.g., Hibernate, JDO), a control-flow language (e.g., JSF), and so forth. These sorts of XML “programs” are unreadable, unmaintainable, an order of magnitude larger than necessary, and audaciously inefficient at runtime Salut, J'ai vu quelques unes de ses conférences sur C++0x. Ce gars une tête de génie. Juste pour dire que je suis totalement d'accord avec lui. ... Programmer en XML :laugh: c'te blague ! +++
-
El Corazon wrote:
For most applications, yes. Microsoft would very much like it to, so yes, it will, though as mentioned, it is still holding on much to MS's dismay.
Do you believe that MS wishes to move toward an operating system that supports ONLY managed applications? An OS where all user-mode code is managed, or else it doesn't run?
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
Richie308 wrote:
Do you believe that MS wishes to move toward an operating system that supports ONLY managed applications? An OS where all user-mode code is managed, or else it doesn't run?
Yes. Microsoft has made it quite clear that this is where they would like to be. They also would rather you not buy any software, only lease an office service, or media service, etc. The operating system would only be the lowest level internet appliance with everything run off their servers, or other company's servers. Getting there is harder than simply wanting to be there. Thus we are where we are.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
I've been saying all along, MFC is well past is sell by date, .net is the only real way to go for modern development, I pity the poor souls still clinging on to there MFC/C++/COM world. I know well spent alot of time with MFC/ATL/COM but it's time to let go and move on, after all it's what ITs about?
Roger Irrelevant "he's completely hatstand"
-
It's all our fault ! :) If We won't use it - it could never be developed :D - Let's get back to asembler and forget about .net :)... about all those forms, ready-to-use controls and components.. ehh. It's hard - isn't it ? I'm also not happy the way it goes - but for now - there is no other option... I think that "The First" software developers had the same feelings when they heard about C language ;)
No, we liked C. You could tell what it was going to do on the assembly level exactly and you could always drop into assembler. Now, the machine code guys, THEY were bent out of shape when the first assembler came along...
-
Well, yes I don't know many people who code raw COM any more, ATL maybe but vanilla COM certainly not. I'm glad spent time learning this stuff because it gives you insight on how modern technologies work and depend on it.
Roger Irrelevant "he's completely hatstand"
-
No. The .NET Framework is seen as "just another application" as far as Windows is concerned. It is not a replacement for anything. Heck, even WPF applications live within an HWND.
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it. - Michelangelo (1475-1564)
Josh Smith wrote:
Heck, even WPF applications live within an HWND.
You'd think they would of got single application instance right as well.:rolleyes:
Roger Irrelevant "he's completely hatstand"
-
What do you think of this guy's opinion? He is Allen Holub from Holub.com http://www.sdtimes.com/fullcolumn/column-20060901-05.html[^] "XML is perhaps the worst programming language ever conceived. I’m not talking about XML as a data-description language, which was its original design. I’m talking about perverting XML for programming applications. It’s inappropriate to use XML as a scripting language (e.g., ANT), a test-description language (e.g., TestNG), an object-relational mapping language (e.g., Hibernate, JDO), a control-flow language (e.g., JSF), and so forth. These sorts of XML “programs” are unreadable, unmaintainable, an order of magnitude larger than necessary, and audaciously inefficient at runtime."
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
I agree, the visionaries don't
Roger Irrelevant "he's completely hatstand"
-
Oh God.. I hate .NET :sigh: --PerspX
"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." - Bill Gates
Time to start rethinking your career then, there's not much to left to pick at; php, ruby, html flash. Unless you work for HP/Microsoft you won't see much Win32/MFC/ATL.
Roger Irrelevant "he's completely hatstand"
-
deostroll wrote:
Is the win32 platform going obsolete? Is it being replaced by the dotnet framework or something like that?
There's this CPian guy here - I forget his name, from Texas. Fellow was dead against .NET and kept saying garbage collection sucks and all that. Last I heard he's been running around in a mad rush trying to get a .NET job. He's even porting some of his C++ code into C#. That says it for you I think. Now if only I could remember who I am talking about. :rolleyes:
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com linkIt most certainly wasn't a "mad rush". Further, the job includes C++ and even a little PHP. I'm certainly expanding my skillset, but I still consider myself to be a C++ programmer first and foremost. Lastly, I may be working in C#/.Net, but you should never assume for even a fraction of a second that my personal view regarding .Net has changed in even the slightest of measurements.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Mark Salsbery wrote:
to be switched over by this fall
And go with Visual Lisp++, it's the wave of the future. Just imagine all the curly-cues :laugh:
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
Is the win32 platform going obsolete? Is it being replaced by the dotnet framework or something like that?
IMO: MFC should have been obsolete years ago. I doubt Win32 is going anywhere. .Net is a better app layer than MFC, IMHO. Having contracted at MS, I can say that at least in the OS and other lower-levels, C++ and Win32 are pretty much here to stay. I heard talk around the halls that XMAL + WPF are here to stay and will become the new MFC/.Net over time. However I, like many others, am skeptical. Personally (this is pure conjecture) I think MS is hoping and believing the "Everything Everywhere Live" (Windows Live, MSN LIve, Live Live, Your-Credit-Card-To-Our-Subscription-Server-Farm Live, etc ad nauseum), apps-through-web-based-subscritions movement is going to take off. If that be the case, XAML + WPF do make some sense. But as others have noted there's a lot of issues left to be resolved before Joe Accountant is going to trust the company farm to "Excel Live" with his data in an MS server farm somewhere and held ransom by BillG. "We're sorry your high availibilty ultra-premium business storage is offline. Your wait time will be 32.6 days. For only $500 per fifteen minutes, we can escalate your call to a live level N LiveGuru support engineer, and hopefully recover your data over in Moses Lake. Message 6."
-
Visual LISP .Net 2010++ , i think
image processing toolkits | batch image processing | blogging
Chris Losinger wrote:
Visual LISP .Net 2010++ , i think
I prefer Prolog myself:rolleyes:.
Paul Watson wrote: Like, if you say sort of, like, you know, one more, you know, time, I'm going to, like, you know, sort of sort you out, you know.
-
Mark Salsbery wrote:
to be switched over by this fall
And go with Visual Lisp++, it's the wave of the future. Just imagine all the curly-cues :laugh:
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
