Why I still use vc6
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
Jim Crafton wrote:
Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler
which is why we use Intel. :-D :-D
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Jim Crafton wrote:
Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler
which is why we use Intel. :-D :-D
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
:mad: You beat me to the comment :)
-
Actually...most VC++ developers here would say that the VC6 compiler, and IDE in general (for the most part) was the best generation of C++ tools MS has ever produced.
Absolutely. Not just most, but *all* the VC++ developers would say that. :)
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·. Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
-
I'm with you on the Visual C++ 6.0 IDE. However, on the compiler, I did notice my benchmarks for VC++ 2003 compiler for the some code is usually quite a bit faster in benchmarks. But in the end, my favorite still is the Visual C++ 6.0 environment overall. I hope they keep their promise that "10 will be the new 6".
bob16972 wrote:
I hope they keep their promise that "10 will be the new 6".
A lot of Visual C++ developers waiting for the release of 10. :)
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·. Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
-
Absolutely. Not just most, but *all* the VC++ developers would say that. :)
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·. Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
Well, I've been out of the loop regarding C++ for at least the last 2 years (more like 3 now), but I definitely know that the C++ compiler in VS2005 caught more than 20 errors in code that I wrote 6 years ago, and VC6 had no problems with it. What's more, when I ran the program after compiling it in VC2005, in resulted in an exception, which I later found to be a buffer overflow. When, however, compiled by VC6, no errors occurred and program executed just fine. Maybe I didnt find some configurations in VC6, but the newer compilers definitely do catch more errors, if nothing else.
"impossible" is just an opinion.
-
Well, I've been out of the loop regarding C++ for at least the last 2 years (more like 3 now), but I definitely know that the C++ compiler in VS2005 caught more than 20 errors in code that I wrote 6 years ago, and VC6 had no problems with it. What's more, when I ran the program after compiling it in VC2005, in resulted in an exception, which I later found to be a buffer overflow. When, however, compiled by VC6, no errors occurred and program executed just fine. Maybe I didnt find some configurations in VC6, but the newer compilers definitely do catch more errors, if nothing else.
"impossible" is just an opinion.
The VC6 compiler, is kinda sucker_ish_ at times. But the IDE rocks. Best usage of screen real estate and is faster. I've always loved it. :)
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·. Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
I'm still dumbfounded that my .NET hello world app consumes 18MB of ram!! :wtf:
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
-
The VC6 compiler, is kinda sucker_ish_ at times. But the IDE rocks. Best usage of screen real estate and is faster. I've always loved it. :)
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·. Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
very true. just saying that its got its problems. and yeah, the IDE was the best.
"impossible" is just an opinion.
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
It's VC6's 10 year anniversary this year. It's in the vc98 folder, isn't it? ;)
-
Actually...most VC++ developers here would say that the VC6 compiler, and IDE in general (for the most part) was the best generation of C++ tools MS has ever produced.
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
I don't really write complex C++ applications, so I might be wrong, but newer Microsoft C++ compilers have a ton of new security checks active by default (arrays, string, automatic linking to safe functions instead of default ones, NX data, etc.). That might explain at least some part of the slow performance. If you ask me, I prefer more security and a slower application myself, but I know the customer might not agree on this. :-D
If you truly believe you need to pick a mobile phone that "says something" about your personality, don't bother. You don't have a personality. A mental illness, maybe - but not a personality. - Charlie Brooker My Photos/CP Flickr Group - ScrewTurn Wiki
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
I'm still dumbfounded that my .NET hello world app consumes 18MB of ram!! :wtf:
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
All work places (job opennings) work with vc6.0. the transformation to 2005/2008 requiere too much work and time, so thay don't upgrade. so my sallery depends on working on vc6.0. therfore I search all the time how to use c# samples ,vb samples and .NET samples using VC6.0 only. lately I have found that the window SDK platform supply most capabilities of C#/VB/.NET using Components and specialised libraries / DLL's. the code comes out much more generic and compatible. it is easy to integrate, migrate and control (sorce safe) the source. bottom line - VC6.0 is most effective for practical job in computers programming. a VC6.0 developer has x3 times more job oportunities then C# / VB / .NET programmers.
One more fan of Simplicity.
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
What sort of processing was this? For numerical stuff I've found VC8 pretty good compared to VC6. If it is text processing you could slow down with the default unicode settings in the later compilers.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
Yes, I too would like to know what source code generated these statistics. I have examined the object code produced by VS 2005 on some of my time critical stuff and I was well impressed.
Paul Sanders http://www.alpinesoft.co.uk
-
People often accuse those still using VC6 as holdouts, dinosaurs, or too lazy to embrace the new. Well in my case it's none of those. I'm still using VC 6 because Microsoft can't seem to produce a compiler that produces faster binaries!!! Same codebase, same machine: vc6 - Took 0.17346851 seconds or 173.4685 milliseconds vc80 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.54633341 seconds or 546.3334 milliseconds vc80, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.32663722 seconds or 326.6372 milliseconds vc90 binaries default optimization settings Took 0.34099583 seconds or 340.9958 milliseconds vc90, turned on favor speed optimization settings Took 0.33104513 seconds or 331.0451 milliseconds So, after nearly a 10 year wait between the releases of VC 6 (1998) and VC 9 (2007) my program runs twice as slow. Sigh...
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
I have been using vc6 until a couple of weeks ago when my computer died and I decided to take the plunge and upgrade to vs2005. What hard work that has turned out to be! Does anyone know of any guides covering upgrading projects from vc6 to vs2005?
