Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. IT & Infrastructure
  4. Is VC/C++ dead???

Is VC/C++ dead???

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT & Infrastructure
csharpc++visual-studioquestionlearning
22 Posts 11 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Y yarp

    I agree with Rassman, there is no alternative to Visual Studio. If MS decide to give up VC++ most companies won't have any other choice than to choose C#. I use CBuilder and Delphi professionaly and they are far below MSVC capabilities - although very good products. I believe that in the end the .NET framework will be a good product too. But as most of you do I'm fond of VC++ and can't imagine I could appreciate working on another language. I hope MS will keep C++ alive, simplicity in programming - like C# - is not a good point for me. That's what Borland did with CBuilder and the result is that everybody is able to make a Windows program that's OK. But it is much more difficult to make good graphics, subclassing, inheritance,... than with VC. I know what I'm talking about. Long life VC++ Yarp

    R Offline
    R Offline
    Rassman
    wrote on last edited by
    #21

    Do you still use OWL? I thought that was an amazingly good system. The only thing stoping me concentrating on that at the time it came out was that I was contracting for a company that insisted on MFC. But for my own utilities I often used OWL. Actually, for that company, I slipped in a few DLL's written using the OWL system (I hope they not reading this, there might tell me off). We do it for the joy of seeing the users struggle.

    Y 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • R Rassman

      Do you still use OWL? I thought that was an amazingly good system. The only thing stoping me concentrating on that at the time it came out was that I was contracting for a company that insisted on MFC. But for my own utilities I often used OWL. Actually, for that company, I slipped in a few DLL's written using the OWL system (I hope they not reading this, there might tell me off). We do it for the joy of seeing the users struggle.

      Y Offline
      Y Offline
      yarp
      wrote on last edited by
      #22

      Nope, I never had the chance to work with OWL. I began programming Borland with Delphi3 and MSVC vith 1.5. I do the contrary : for my own utilities -in CBuilder- I use MFC DLL's which produce smaller code ;)) The drawback of Borlands products compared to MS is that you've got to provide the runtime DLL's with your application. It make those hard to deploy on the Web. So you're an OWL nostalgic ? Hope, I won't ever be a C++ one ;)) Either Borland or MSVC I love that language. Yarp

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      Reply
      • Reply as topic
      Log in to reply
      • Oldest to Newest
      • Newest to Oldest
      • Most Votes


      • Login

      • Don't have an account? Register

      • Login or register to search.
      • First post
        Last post
      0
      • Categories
      • Recent
      • Tags
      • Popular
      • World
      • Users
      • Groups