.Net AppFramework
-
>You're a member of the Billy G fan club too? [...] What on earth is the Billy G fan club :confused: ? Are you both joking, or does this fan club realy exist? Max
Of course it does. Though I have a bit of a conundrum... The Linus T fan club stipulates in it's rules that a fan may not also be a member of the Billy G club (though the Billy G fan club gives kudos to Linus T fan's joining the Billy G club). My recommendation, if you want to join both fan clubs, is to get a fake ID, social security number and really, really old orange anorrak and then join the Linus T fan club with that lot. For the Billy G club I recommend a shark fin, CEO suit, switch blade knife for quick back stabbings oh and a flashy looking credit card/cheque book. Then again you could just ignore both Fan Clubs and carry on being a CP fan :) *sorry Max, just felt like having a bit of fun on a slow Sunday. I think the only ppl who can join the Billy G fan club have the words "Fortune 100" or "WTO" in their resume ;) regards, Paul Watson Cape Town, South Africa e: paulmwatson@email.com w: vergen.org
-
My big complaint is that MS is still treating C++ as the bastard child in this case. The RAD facilities won't work for C++. Their argument (as I've seen posted on the Usenet) is that it's too difficult to do with C++'s preprocessor and macros. This is hogwash to me. First, the MFC wizards work despite this, and the issues should be the same. Second, the RAD stuff should be able to be seperated out into sections of the code where MS specific #pragmas could actually turn the preprocessor off. Third, C++ programmers can just live with any theoretical problems that might exist here. There really isn't any (valid) excuse for the RAD stuff to not work with C++. William E. Kempf
Umm... Do you understand how the RAD stuff works? Unlike the old way, where dialogs were laid out in binary resource files, the .NET designers work with code. When you drag a button onto your form, it generates code in your app to do so, not just data in a form file. Since this code can be edited by hand, the C++ designers have to reverse engineer C++ code in order to layout the forms again for round-trip. C++, espcially ANSI C++ is a VERY complex language to do this in, since it has to understand free-form C++ and cannot rely on special code warts. If you notice, VC7 has moved away from using inline comments for markers, even for the MFC classwizard stuff. It's all gone. They're goal is to not require *ANY* markers in your code to validate such stuff. Yeah, MS could do what you mention, however, they'd have to start all their designs over since this would invalidate their code in progress. They claim they will release a C++ designer later, either in an update or in VC7.1 (when they also provide the remaining standard conformance). Is it annoying? Yeah.. Same with standards conformance. But they have a lot on their plate, and this slipped.