Why I still use vc6
-
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?
-
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.
Anton Afanasyev wrote:
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.
That would be pretty much everyone except Christian Graus...
"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 -
It is, but you can't live with the past forever.
In this case, you're completely wrong. There is NOTHING that VC8 or 9 gives you that you cannot do in VC6.
"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 -
Isn't anyone else going to say it's all .NET's fault? I like the libraries and the IDE, but if you're building something speed-critical, you can't really use .NET.
But it's not .net's fault because he's doing unmanaged code.
"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 -
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?
I did a major port from VC6 to VS2005 last year. There are some upgrade docs on the microsoft site (search on vc++ breaking changes), but I found the easiest way was to work through the errors/warnings file by file. Sometimes for deprecated functions you could do a project-wide search and replace, but simply working from one warning/error to the next was the easiest for me. The other thing to be wary of is the new .exe has a manifest and some of the older installers do not seem to do the right thing (we were using the free Installshield that came with VC6 - no flames please - it did the job). We moved to using the setup project you can create in VS2005 that creates a .msi file for the MS installer. One annoying thing here is that the installation file size doubled as I think it automatically included some extra .dlls, I can't recall which.
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."
-
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.
ori kovacsi wrote:
the transformation to 2005/2008 requiere too much work and time, so thay don't upgrade.
That's a bunch of crap. As a test, we converted a 760,000 line app from VC6 to VC8 in less than two hours. We turned off deprecation warnings, and ended up with almost 2500 errors on the first run-through. Fully 2000 of those errors were on the same line of code involving a single derived class. Running the program didn't expose anything as far as conversion-related problems but... The actual cost of the conversion lies in thorough testing to ensure the conversion process didn't break anything. We didn't have the time to do that, and the program remained in VC6 until the code was retired a couple of years later. Large legacy apps should remain in the compiler/language they were originally written in, but not using the newest tools on new projects is about three degrees past "stupid". Granted, the IDE in VS2005 and later suck giant bull testicles, but the benefits of the newer libraries are not wisely discarded.
"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 -
I'm assuming the speed decrease in .net is due to compilation to bytecode instead of native code.. but doesn't the 'Win32' option for a project type in VS.net let you compile to native?
HE'S NOT TALKING ABOUT .NET! Geeze people... He's talking about UN-MANAGED CODE.
"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 -
In this case, you're completely wrong. There is NOTHING that VC8 or 9 gives you that you cannot do in VC6.
"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, 10/26/2001Oh, what have the Romans ever done for us... except giving us standards compliance?
-
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
Besides VC6 still be the fastest Microsoft's compiler, It is not C/C++ standard compliant. Because of that, Microsoft modified their compiler several times. Since VC8, Microsoft claims that their compiler is 100% C/C++ compliant with the standards. When you are focusing softwares only for Windows, to use VC6 is not an issue. But, if you are doing something that needs to be portable on several operating systems, VC6 can lead you at wrong results. The best thing, in that case, is you to choose an slower but most standard compliant compiler: GCC. One think must be said: there is none compiler 100% standard compliant. That is the fact.
Alessandro Antonello
-
Steve Echols wrote:
consumes 18MB of ram!
Correction, it reserves 18MB of virtual space. Private bytes shows 7MB, and the heap, 0MB.
xacc.ide - now with IronScheme support
IronScheme - 1.0 alpha 2 out now -
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
Paul Sanders (AlpineSoft) wrote:
Yes, I too would like to know what source code generated these statistics.
RCChineseDict.cpp[^] It's modeled after an article by Raymond Chen here: Loading the dictionary, part 1: Starting point[^] I was curious to see how the VCF would fare compared to Raymond's attempts. That's where the numbers come from.
¡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.
-
HE'S NOT TALKING ABOUT .NET! Geeze people... He's talking about UN-MANAGED CODE.
"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 -
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?
-
Paul Sanders (AlpineSoft) wrote:
Yes, I too would like to know what source code generated these statistics.
RCChineseDict.cpp[^] It's modeled after an article by Raymond Chen here: Loading the dictionary, part 1: Starting point[^] I was curious to see how the VCF would fare compared to Raymond's attempts. That's where the numbers come from.
¡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
FWIW, it looks like overhead in the implementation of STL strings, rather than poor compiler optimisation. This is (to me) useful to know. Thx for posting.
Paul Sanders http://www.alpinesoft.co.uk
-
FWIW, it looks like overhead in the implementation of STL strings, rather than poor compiler optimisation. This is (to me) useful to know. Thx for posting.
Paul Sanders http://www.alpinesoft.co.uk
Perhaps but I consider that all part of the product. It's not like I can just take the STL from VC6 and use it in VC9. So if their standard C++ components (i.e. the STL) is sucky, then, to me at least, the effect is just the same - an app that runs at half speed :(
¡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
-
Perhaps but I consider that all part of the product. It's not like I can just take the STL from VC6 and use it in VC9. So if their standard C++ components (i.e. the STL) is sucky, then, to me at least, the effect is just the same - an app that runs at half speed :(
¡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
That's very true.
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
A nice thing about vc6 (among many others) is that it generates MFC code that only assumes mfc42.dll ... which has been part of the standard install since Win98-First-Edition (Win95 had mfc40.dll) You can link dynamically for really small executables and be confident that mfc42.dll will be present on 99% of the computers that will use your software (and many with Win95 will have picked up mfc42.dll somewere). I've also found that vc71, vc8, and vc9 generate somewhat slower code. However, I think the "search in files" and "tabbed property page per source file" work better in vc71. Also, "hover" to see definitions is handy. I tend to use vc71 for development and debugging, and generate the final executable for release with vc6.
-
I also use vc6, but I don't think vc6 is famous for its compiler. As everyone knowns, it is famous for its IDE.
