yeah! - The equalizer is amazing - all 2.x keyboard bindings work - look is great ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Of course my post totally missed the point - basically the orignal poster probably already knew what they wanted and now just looked for a criteria on finding out the "perfect" c++ guy. Well the reason I am quoting Joel is a) he's basically always right :-) b) he shows the necessity of "getting things done". I think the latest OO-knowledge is NOT critical to getting things done - in essence if any OO-Wizardry does not reflect real life, you might be in trouble with the hired OO-Wizard. Of course, a lot of people get things done _and_ are OO-wizards. But getting things done nearlly always means a compromise - and this is sometimes opposite to the latest OO-Talk. Doesn't have too, but to me it seems so. Programs were shipped in time prior to the invention of UML/Objectory/whatever, and they were OO. MFC is just another one of those examples. Practical, but not high-end science. Or consider templates (as described in Modern c++ design). Hey, I wanted portable strings and containers, _not_ a new paradigm of programming. And the list goes on. I hope the original poster gets their Wiz and that guy gets things done :) ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

:) Better take a look at this http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000073.html[^] ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

BTW: - I do MFC/C++ for a living right now - I am not doin .NET at all, and will only use it if I have to. ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

NONE in production yet. You are completely right. Native Apps rule, As you said MS products are still running natively. "Unmanaged" C++ still has the ultimate edge in my eyes - Just think about games. What I wanted to say is this: We are mostly application developers, some are doing system development (performance, scalability) etc, but most of us are application developers - look at the apps we build every day for our living (which probably aren't RDBMS)? So basically we are consuming APIs which provide most of the functionality. If you need a functionality which is provided by a .NET API *ONLY*, you probably have to develop "for .NET". Just think about a high-end gfx card, which contains whatever new Rendering /Radiosity/whatever functionality to you. Now if you are an OpenGL programmer, you probably need GL Extensions rovided by the manufacturer to efficiently use the features of your gfx card. Now if your gfx card functionality is only exposed by DirectX API, you just _have_ to develop with DirectX or you cannot use that functionality. (or the opposite). ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

ACK, even though this is a personal/philosophical point of view. - Still, google is running python. Well, I must give them an email and ask them to reconsider their overall software strategy / architecture. - Whats really bad about python? strings are immutable. This is getting personal ;) ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Hey, its quite easy... - .NET is the enhancement of Win32, with win32 fading over time/still being supported. Expect new or crucial functionality (security is one) of a new MS OS (longhorn?) to only being exposed by a .NET API. Also, you do not want to hear your customers say "Hey you are not using unmanaged code, are you?" (just look how BAD that sounds. Unmanaged, chaotic, insecure, unprofessional). - You can say, I do not care! I only need what win32 has to offer (and I am sure MS will not break win32). But... Your customers will use the next Microsoft OS, which will be your development target. Now since that new feature you REALLY NEED will only be exposed via .NET API, you have to use the .NET API. - Since C# is considered sexy (philosophically, technically and whatevery) AND better integrated with the IDE AND really naturally fitting the .CLR AND someday probably as performant as C++ in the context of .NET AND the political way to do it you would be a masochist to use managed C++ exclusively. - Java introduced Hype into the programming world. Programmers are customers. They want to have a nice "philosophy" of programming, best object-oriented, etc. They can really get *fanatic* upon those things. So why not feed them what they need? PRO: Programming for simple/medium apps (up to 300 000loc) made easier. CON: I wonder how Oracle will implement a performant DB server ontop of .NET. Or photoshop? Of course, this will never be an argument for a programmer like me. CON: MS has the major control over application performance (just like those java guys improving the performance because they use the so-so-fast JRockit JVM from BEA). Bottom line: customers use new MS OS that is _REALLY_ good and cool, you program for that audience, you need API functionaly, this is provided by .NET, and you are a .NET programmer. Quite simple! ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Sorry for you ;) Python obviously isn't bad for those small companies google, ILM and NASA. Yeah, you got me. I like Python. :) ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Marc Clifton wrote: First off, the guy lures you into the idea that incredibly powerful tools waste time because they're so hard to learn, having so many features. Right, he even comes along with a software development process (Extreme programming) and compares it with a tool (a debugger). People use a tool for a specific reason. It's just a tool. It does not say anything about programming abilities. In 1989 when i was programmming 68k assembly, you basically had step, step into, run-to-line, print exp, etc.. these commands haven't really changed since then. ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Michael P Butler wrote: Ah, there we go. Teach. Probably not doing a lot of real world development then. As far as I can remember, absolute newbees do not get the point of line-by-line execution by a runtime. If they actually see a debugger tracing through their code and see the value of vars change, something inside their heads makes "click" (basically, this way you just set the troff flag in their brain's status register and off they go ;) ). ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Joe Woodbury wrote: What silliness. I just fixed a handful of bugs that would have taken ages to track down without a debugger [..]( - Yeah, its basically a very good thing to get your debugger to that line whre the whole problem starts as soon you press F11. you have the whole thing reproduced to that point. you have the stack trace, the variables, everything. - Or leaks - Consider other peoples code you do not know - you have only .h or .dll and you might have debugging info enabled. Its so important - Some runtimes (java,python) automatically give you stack traces via stdout/stderr but with c++/c you would have to dig for it .. debugger of course solves that problem too ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Paul Watson wrote: Lets not forget that for web-dev a print statement can be misleading. [..] I agree! Another one: Consider a layered application, where some high level code (main app) calls another module/class, say in a DLL. Each of them gives verbose output to the debug window - You will have problems sorting out which component gave which output, a total mess. Even with a logging API. ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Debuggers are a wasteful Timesink I couldn't disagree more with this article/statement whatever. I mean talking about real life and productiviy. Unbelievable!! Errr now *you* waste your precious time with that article :-) Gotta work. ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

I turned away from visio as soon as I found out I could only set the drop shadow for *all* boxes in my drawing using the *page properties* Please, everyone do their own testdrive ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Thanks for your insight - The original poster asked about a _diagram_ tool, poseidon is a diagram tool, CASE and even more. Its a different thing. He did not ask for any further features (CASE, integration etc) offered by the software. Of course, they might be nice and in fact so encouraging he might be interested in purchasing it. - I haven't encountered any problems /w ArgoUML and I will definitely look into Poseidon for UML _as_soon_ as I encounter some (I am not a heavy user and not doing CASE or using their other features) Enough said, every one do their **own** testdrive... ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Its based on ArgoUML (free), so you can use that directly. ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

- You can model with ArgoUML (slow sloppy java) . Its actually a case tool, but I It supports most of UML and is free. Export to EPS or gif, I think. You have to get used to the UI but you can do everything (for creating UML diagrams) with it. http://argouml.tigris.org/ - DIA. something supposed to clone Visio. available on win32, too. open source stuff. I hate it. It is an ultimate user-agnostic experience (regarding GUI). you cannot resize UML elements. they are always as big as the text (they hold). This seems reasonable, but think about state diagrams. http://www.lysator.liu.se/~alla/dia/ - Powerpoint You know it, and it works. It has no direct UML support (who cares). you have to buildup everything using primitives... But it works. Dia could be used in that way too. - UML Studio (pragsoft) Again a case tool, but not too expensive and with a slick UI. Its fun creating the diagrams. Ask bruce eckel for more stuff http://www.mindview.net/WebLog/log-0041 Bottom line: Use _your_ favourite drawing tool for the job. CASE sucks, anyway. I use argoUML just for diagrams and nothing else, and its ok. have fun ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Now to some real low-cost computing stuff (remember that ridiculous low-cost computing event /w oracle and sun btw?). IBM Thinkpad R40e (Mobile Celeron 1.7GHz, 512MB RAM, XP Pro, 14'). Pro + Sufficient power to run development environment (VC6 + occassionally SQL Server2K) + Good display, but not perfect ++ very, very silent ++ very good keyboard ++ very cheap (it was 899€ here) ++ quite light (2.7kg) + extensible (ultrabay, etc), spare parts are no problem + trackpoint rocks Cons: - Battery power ~ 2.3h :( - no USB 2.0 and other (firewire, wlan, etc) - Radeon IGP (Shared memory Radeon /wo T&L), but basic OpenGL is fine! I love it. Its my desktop replacement. 1024x768 is just perfect for 14'. Its a bargain. its my cutie. I love it. I never want to miss her eeehhrr it :) Greetz ______________________________ Java: The living proof Moore's law won't solve all your problems

Kannan Kalyanaraman wrote: I think its a conspiracy from MS to pull some of the c++ developers towards the new language(c#) and I think they have some success on that. :-))) I do not believe in such a thing as a 'conspiracy', but there are definetely strategic reasons for that move. Seriously, with Stan Lipmann in Microsoft and Managed VC++ being the only optimising Language for the .NET platform right now, I feel very content. They have done a really nice work in migrating 'classic' C++ and legacy applications into .NET, leaving the choice up to us. Just see what happens, if you build a language, a platform, a marketing system, a monopoly and fundamentalism: Java - some developers get really tied to that whole look-and-feel programming thing. So it is a great idea to leverage the huge amount of Java-programming people to the .NET platform AND building and own army of C# fanatics ;-) After all, I feel more free on the .NET side: I have more choices, My code is not broken, and I know the MFC code will be supported for a long time, I know Microsoft really puts significant efforts on the platform, I do not live on an isolated island where everything has a "J" in front of everything's names, and people believe Moore's law will eventually solve all their efficency problems. I personally decided to do managed extensions for C++ exclusively, GUI plumbing done in C# only. Also,i was wondering is there a plan from MS to build something like a mfc framework for .net. If MS doesnt do this, I think some 3rd party will eventually do ( Chris Sells is doing one but not sure if its commercial). We should not pollute (sorry for that) the .NET framework with something as ugly (but stable and practical) as MFC...

Hi! http://groups.google.de/groups?q=Re:+WinForms+deigner+for+VC%2B%2B&hl=de&selm=OcdlxDquBHA.2404%40tkmsftngp02&rnum=1 Do you people miss a winforms designer for vc .net ? I think things like this would make things more easy for newbies... bye