VS 6.0 or VS 7.0??
-
Hi. I like to know if there are some kind of advantages in VS 7.0 if I write application with just MFC and Win32 SDK. If there are, wich are? Just a few examples. Thanks. Demian.
-
Hi. I like to know if there are some kind of advantages in VS 7.0 if I write application with just MFC and Win32 SDK. If there are, wich are? Just a few examples. Thanks. Demian.
While it doesn't directly answer your question, I'd like to offer this. Don't buy the latest version of something just because it is the latest version. Like any tool, a compiler is meant to solve a problem. Each problem has a set of requirements. If the compiler can meet each of those requirements, then that's the tool for the job. While the newer versions of Visual C++ have more bells and whistles than older versions, you have to ask yourself if those bells are whistles are "wants" or "needs." For the past 11 years, my work has been solely governed by the clients for which we sell to. I don't have an exact date, but it was many years after Windows 95 was released, our clients were still using 16-bit Windows. The developers, myself included, were in agony because we could not update our development tools. When clients started buying new computers that came with Windows 98 pre-installed, only then did we get the go-ahead to buy and use Visual C++ v5. Even today, I have no business reason to use anything other than Visual C++ v6. The clients that use our software are mostly Windows 98 and Windows 2000. I'm sure a handful of them are probably using Windows XP. But the biggest factor is that the EXE that our DLL hooks up with is still being compiled (by IBM) with Visual C++ v5. They might be using v6, but I can't say for sure. Any new development that they do, however, is in Java.
"The pointy end goes in the other man." - Antonio Banderas (Zorro, 1998)
-
Hi. I like to know if there are some kind of advantages in VS 7.0 if I write application with just MFC and Win32 SDK. If there are, wich are? Just a few examples. Thanks. Demian.
-
Hi. I like to know if there are some kind of advantages in VS 7.0 if I write application with just MFC and Win32 SDK. If there are, wich are? Just a few examples. Thanks. Demian.
VS7.1 VC6 doesn't really support the C++ standard very well. VS7.1 does a very good job of this. VS7.1 fixes a lot of the problems with the 7.0 IDE which is what a LOT of people whine about. At BioWare and my previous job, we are all switching to VS7.x. It would be a mistake this late in the game to use VS6.0 for a new project. The lack of support might be an issue. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
-
While it doesn't directly answer your question, I'd like to offer this. Don't buy the latest version of something just because it is the latest version. Like any tool, a compiler is meant to solve a problem. Each problem has a set of requirements. If the compiler can meet each of those requirements, then that's the tool for the job. While the newer versions of Visual C++ have more bells and whistles than older versions, you have to ask yourself if those bells are whistles are "wants" or "needs." For the past 11 years, my work has been solely governed by the clients for which we sell to. I don't have an exact date, but it was many years after Windows 95 was released, our clients were still using 16-bit Windows. The developers, myself included, were in agony because we could not update our development tools. When clients started buying new computers that came with Windows 98 pre-installed, only then did we get the go-ahead to buy and use Visual C++ v5. Even today, I have no business reason to use anything other than Visual C++ v6. The clients that use our software are mostly Windows 98 and Windows 2000. I'm sure a handful of them are probably using Windows XP. But the biggest factor is that the EXE that our DLL hooks up with is still being compiled (by IBM) with Visual C++ v5. They might be using v6, but I can't say for sure. Any new development that they do, however, is in Java.
"The pointy end goes in the other man." - Antonio Banderas (Zorro, 1998)
Yes, that's totally true. I understand what you say. I thought about substantial changes or advantages, por example in serialization, maybe is more simple or diferent, I don't know, something like that. Because I'm going to developed a new application and maybe the serialization process is better or easy in VS 7.0. Well, thank you very much. Regards from Argentina. Demian.
-
While it doesn't directly answer your question, I'd like to offer this. Don't buy the latest version of something just because it is the latest version. Like any tool, a compiler is meant to solve a problem. Each problem has a set of requirements. If the compiler can meet each of those requirements, then that's the tool for the job. While the newer versions of Visual C++ have more bells and whistles than older versions, you have to ask yourself if those bells are whistles are "wants" or "needs." For the past 11 years, my work has been solely governed by the clients for which we sell to. I don't have an exact date, but it was many years after Windows 95 was released, our clients were still using 16-bit Windows. The developers, myself included, were in agony because we could not update our development tools. When clients started buying new computers that came with Windows 98 pre-installed, only then did we get the go-ahead to buy and use Visual C++ v5. Even today, I have no business reason to use anything other than Visual C++ v6. The clients that use our software are mostly Windows 98 and Windows 2000. I'm sure a handful of them are probably using Windows XP. But the biggest factor is that the EXE that our DLL hooks up with is still being compiled (by IBM) with Visual C++ v5. They might be using v6, but I can't say for sure. Any new development that they do, however, is in Java.
"The pointy end goes in the other man." - Antonio Banderas (Zorro, 1998)
Well said, David! :-D I have both VC7.1 and VC 6 and for some reason, I keep going back to VC6. Call it comfort, call it habit, it just plain works. And if it ain't broke.... onwards and upwards...