DavidCrow wrote: Why? That implies that those who do not know/use STL are lost. Can such a generalization be made? Because I'm sure a LOT of people who use the MFC containers don't even know they are part of MFC. If I am used to using a language, and suddenly the part I try to use goes AWOL, I will be confused, and I'll need to find/learn an alternative. That's all I meant by 'lost'. DavidCrow wrote: Ok, but what if support for more than one compiler is not one of the requirements? Is that still a reason to use one over the other? Yes, for the reasons I stated. Apart from the STL containers being *better*, they are also cross platform, you lose NOTHING by learning how to use them, and if you find yourself on a project that is on another platform, you'll already know how to use the containers there. DavidCrow wrote: For example. It is bad practice IMO to tie yourself to a specific platform, which is not even universal in the Windows world, let alone the programming world at large, when the standard alternative is actually better. Microsoft did not intend for people to do this, either. Just like it's bad practice to pass char * around instead of using a string class, or FILE handles instead of a stream class, but people do it, because it's what they are used to, and they never stop to think of alternatives. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++