VC++ sucks.
-
More respect towards VC Here bad words cannot be said..... An expression from my country. It does not give the head you? Cheers!!! :suss: Carlos Antollini.
-
Speaking of VC++ and how much it sucks, I've got some issues with the debugger. Has anyone, in the history of the universe, found it helpful when the debugger points to a line of "disassembly" code to point out your error? The value of that debugging technique is completely lost on me, and I was wondering how it helps anyone. Otherwise, VC++ could be worse.
-
It certainly leaves a lot to be desired in many ways. But I would hate to write a large, complex windows app without it! If you had been around pre-1993 trying to put together a large windows app (not a little in-house job that VB is for) you would appreciate it more.
-
Speaking of VC++ and how much it sucks, I've got some issues with the debugger. Has anyone, in the history of the universe, found it helpful when the debugger points to a line of "disassembly" code to point out your error? The value of that debugging technique is completely lost on me, and I was wondering how it helps anyone. Otherwise, VC++ could be worse.
-
Yes, this is often extremely helpful. Learning a little asm will be well worth your time. Oh, and the VC++ debugger is pretty good, for user mode programs at least. What have you used that's any better??
SoftICE -Ben --------- On the topic of code with no error handling -- It's not poor coding, it's "optimistic" ;)
-
Speaking of VC++ and how much it sucks, I've got some issues with the debugger. Has anyone, in the history of the universe, found it helpful when the debugger points to a line of "disassembly" code to point out your error? The value of that debugging technique is completely lost on me, and I was wondering how it helps anyone. Otherwise, VC++ could be worse.
it helps sometimes if i'm doing low-level optimizations. but, i could easily get along without it. benchmarking is usually a better way of telling which tricks are faster. -c ------------------------------ Smaller Animals Software, Inc. http://www.smalleranimals.com
-
Speaking of VC++ and how much it sucks, I've got some issues with the debugger. Has anyone, in the history of the universe, found it helpful when the debugger points to a line of "disassembly" code to point out your error? The value of that debugging technique is completely lost on me, and I was wondering how it helps anyone. Otherwise, VC++ could be worse.
Well, perhaps ppl, like experts use it.
-
so go use c++ builder and leave us in peace --- "every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots"
-
Speaking of VC++ and how much it sucks, I've got some issues with the debugger. Has anyone, in the history of the universe, found it helpful when the debugger points to a line of "disassembly" code to point out your error? The value of that debugging technique is completely lost on me, and I was wondering how it helps anyone. Otherwise, VC++ could be worse.
John Robbins excellent book 'Debugging Windows' tells you how to figure what line of code you crashed on using the disassembly window. It also tells you how to write crash handlers and lots of cool stuff. It's not just about how to push F10 and F11 in the debug Window ( like the useless 'Desigining user interfaces' book, has anyone actually *bought* that. No weait, don't tell me. ). Anyone who doesn't have this book should buy it. Christian #include "std_disclaimer.h" People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either one being made. The things that come to those who wait are usually the things left by those who got there first.
-
It's funny, I accidentally corssposted into comp.lang.java.advocacy with the comment 'java sucks' a few months ago. I wasn't trolling like this anonymous clown, I was actually talking about languages to do graphics in, the user had asked about java ( hence the cross post I did not see ). I must say that we are a far more restrained lot than the guys ( and gals I s'pose ) on c.l.j.a. Talk about starting a firestorm...... To the clown who started the thread - have the guts to put your name to your posts, and the intelligence to either present your case if you want to discuss it, or shutting up and going away if you're just looking for attention. Christian #include "std_disclaimer.h" People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either one being made. The things that come to those who wait are usually the things left by those who got there first.
-
-
John Robbins excellent book 'Debugging Windows' tells you how to figure what line of code you crashed on using the disassembly window. It also tells you how to write crash handlers and lots of cool stuff. It's not just about how to push F10 and F11 in the debug Window ( like the useless 'Desigining user interfaces' book, has anyone actually *bought* that. No weait, don't tell me. ). Anyone who doesn't have this book should buy it. Christian #include "std_disclaimer.h" People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either one being made. The things that come to those who wait are usually the things left by those who got there first.
Christian, do you mean "Debugging Applications" by Robbins? That was the only one I saw on Amazon.
-
I've only recently started playing with it, and like most such tools it has it's good points and it's bad. I find it anoying that with a very small ammount of use I've been baffled by two unrelated compiler faults and one, shall we say, infelicity of design in MFC which meant going all round the houses to do something which ought to be trivial (replacing one of the windows under a splitter). There seems to be a certain ammount of too clever by half about MFC. Fancy techniques used where simple techniques would have been more flexible. I find much of the documentation nearly useless, being formulaic in nature when it ought to be explanatory. It's also irritating that the class references are on CDROM and take forever to acccess (it also interferes with my listening to music while I hack). On the other hand I find the IDE surprisingly useful. Compiler errrors tend to be vague but runtime errors are quite well handled. The debugger seems quite good (is there an "evaluate expression" anywhere?).
-
I've only recently started playing with it, and like most such tools it has it's good points and it's bad. I find it anoying that with a very small ammount of use I've been baffled by two unrelated compiler faults and one, shall we say, infelicity of design in MFC which meant going all round the houses to do something which ought to be trivial (replacing one of the windows under a splitter). There seems to be a certain ammount of too clever by half about MFC. Fancy techniques used where simple techniques would have been more flexible. I find much of the documentation nearly useless, being formulaic in nature when it ought to be explanatory. It's also irritating that the class references are on CDROM and take forever to acccess (it also interferes with my listening to music while I hack). On the other hand I find the IDE surprisingly useful. Compiler errrors tend to be vague but runtime errors are quite well handled. The debugger seems quite good (is there an "evaluate expression" anywhere?).
In this age of 40 gig drives, you'd be mad not to have the MSDN fully installed on your hard drive. Christian #include "std_disclaimer.h" People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either one being made. The things that come to those who wait are usually the things left by those who got there first.
-
In this age of 40 gig drives, you'd be mad not to have the MSDN fully installed on your hard drive. Christian #include "std_disclaimer.h" People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either one being made. The things that come to those who wait are usually the things left by those who got there first.
So when was the old law: Files expand to fill the space available repealed?;) Actually it's probably just parsimonius habbits (that, and having three separate opertating systems).