Super Lloyd wrote:

#warning super cali fragilistic expi ali docious

If my code would be in C#, I would use the #warning pragma :) int __todo; is the only way I've found that works between different C++ compilers.

I use an "int __todo_description;" instead. Gives me a compiler warning. Now I only need to get rid of these 205 warnings :^)

The Digital Worm wrote:

MS is working hard days and nights to provide you SP 1 VS2012 in time, please hold your breath till then.

FTFY

l a u r e n wrote:

it does not repsect the theme settings and uses some god awful blue effect

You need the Color Theme Editor Soma brags about here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/somasegar/archive/2010/07/02/vs-2010-productivity-improvements-part-iv.aspx[^] P.S.: A color theme editor is a productivity improvement? If so, are there any studies which color makes developers most productive? Is this a special RGB value internally used by MS and patented like they did with the hyperlink color on Bing?

It seems that they didn't focus on the desktop version this time, but rather on the cloud. I think the desktop market is saturated, so the focus will be on collaboration and cloud features in the future. OOXML won't be fully supported until Office 15, so Office 14 can be skipped.

Nishant Sivakumar wrote:

Other than the good feeling of using the latest version, did Office 2010 give you anything that Office 2007 did not?

I'm sure there are new features, though I haven't found them during my daily work. The file menu button is now Scenic-like, which is the biggest change I have discovered yet. They haven't even changed the entire themes this round. SmartArt has been improved, but at least I don't create PP presentation with pictures: http://blogs.technet.com/b/office2010/archive/2010/05/06/smartart-diagram-improvements.aspx[^]

"...and recovered their 50,000 pounds share from the businessman" Not really a good businessman. With an average inflation of 2% per year after 20 years the money will be 50% less worth (1.02 ^ 20). If he would instead pay the 50,000 pounds taxes he'll only have 90,000 pounds left now, but even at an interest rate of 2% over 20 years he'll ends up with 140,000 pounds then. So what do we learn from this story? Either do it right or pay your taxes.

The back is from the Porsche Carrera GT, released much earlier than the Tesla Roadster. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_Carrera_GT[^]

harold aptroot wrote:

Wouldn't that be implementation dependent?

I don't see anything where the behaviour is undefined in the C++ specification.

int a, b, c((3, a) = (0?(a=6):(b=7), (a << b >> a), b = 5));

Of course without using your favourite C++ debugger ;)

http://popflyteam.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!51018025071FD37F!336.entry[^] http://www.techflash.com/microsoft/Microsoft_cuts_Popfly_mashup_tool_citing_economic_refocus_50958577.html[^]

Rocky Moore wrote:

What about you? What is the killer app or killer features that would move you to W7 or beyond?

Multiplayer Solitaire :cool:

kinar wrote:

Win98 is what Win95 should have been.

I disagree. Win95b is what Win95 should have been. I never liked Win98 with the integration of IE (aka Active Desktop / Explorer etc.)

There won't be a killer app for some time go come. We had a big shift in technology when apps moved from DOS to Win16 (1992) and then a few years later with the shift to Win32 (1995). Neither 64-bit computing, multi-core or software stacks like WPF etc. will result in such a shift. Don't know when we move from Windows as we know it to something new, but I doubt it will happen within the next 5 years. That's why XP (and basically also Win2000) will be good for an other 5 years.

N a v a n e e t h wrote:

I asked this question sometime back to Herb Sutter on his blog and he said there is a good road map for C++/CLI.

Was this before they decided to realign their resources on native code? COM was said to be dead, and now all new OS interfaces in Vista+7 are COM. The only promising new technology from Microsoft is Direct2D. I hope that will be backported to Vista and XP.

N a v a n e e t h wrote:

But I am still sad that they don't have intellisense support for C++/CLI Frown

C++/CLI is dead, get over it. There is an old post from Brandon Bray about mixed types, "Basically, if we had implemented everything written in the unified type system document, we would be calling this release Visual C++ 2010." (http://blogs.msdn.com/branbray/archive/2005/07/20/441099.aspx[^]) Now we have VC2010, still no mixed types and not even Intellisense anymore. No WPF designer for C++/CLI etc. I think it's pretty clear that C++/CLI is not the future.

John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:

A) answer 1 B) answer 2 C) answer 3 D) All of the above E) None of the above F) (your answer) The test is crap - correct answer

Pete O'Hanlon wrote:

You, also, can't declare a method as abstract if it's not in an abstract class.

Ok, so Harold was wrong with his answer. In C++/CLI

ref class A
{
virtual foo() = 0;
};

gives a warning because of the missing abstract behind the class. But in C++ you can also provide a default implementation of a method AND declare it as abstract (pure virtual).

class A
{
virtual foo() = 0
{
doSomething();
}
}

If C# does not force me to declare every method as abstract, the test is wrong here again.

molesworth wrote:

However, using "String" or "string" as variable names is going to throw up compile errors.

I know, but I thought the questioner wanted to see if we know that ToLower() returns a copy, but obviously that was not his intention X|

I've choosen a) because ToLower() returns a copy of the string X| a) (your answer) String = string.ToLower(string); b) ToLower(string); c) string.ToLower(); - correct answer d) string.ToLower(string);