void CWhatever::OnOK()
{
CWnd* pWnd = GetFocus();

if (pWnd)
pWnd->SetFocus();

CTabPage::OnOK();
}

The function was appropriately commented with a Doxygen comment stating "OK. This method is called by the framework when the user chooses the OK button."

Ruby is an over-hyped toy. Don't go for the popular language, go for the one with a proven track record. P.S: Guess what language had a bunch of UGLY vulnerabilities[^] lately (and the patch was segfaulting). This is not the first time either.

Cobalt has a very cool GUI! My guess is that grymmjack used Photoshop-like software for creating it, but for mockups I suggest simpler graphics software: you could take screenshots of the current Cobalt GUI, import them and cut them up into layers, duplicate them, move them around. Paint.NET is entry-level free software; you should try it first. Paint Shop Pro is much better and has more features for ~99$.

Thanks for the informative blog posts and for the pictures. ;)

Oh, what have the Romans ever done for us... except giving us standards compliance?

That's easy: they both SUCK, so they should lose to standard HTML + CSS + javascript.

Except in the case of C#, where it's more like cloning the giants and changing their clothes. :laugh:

The only noteworthy difference between Java and .NET is the parent company, but many people wouldn't touch anything created by Microsoft with a 10 meter pole.

I wonder who those poor deluded souls are, the ones that think Microsoft is making a mistake by keeping C++ alive. Maybe they're the ones that would like Microsoft to rewrite Windows, Office and Visual Studio from scratch in C# or Ruby on Rails.

El Corazon wrote:there are those who believe C++ is dead, and those who do not. You are about to find out who. Read that as "there are those who bought the .NET marketing and advertising hype, and those who did not."

Every major software they've ever released is coded in C/C++. They are very interested in C++, but they'd rather have all the other programmers code just in .NET, happily becoming addicted to it.

The code produces no warning at W4 in VC++ 2003.

Just because many Windows programmers develop LOB/enterprisey software, it doesn't mean software development equals .NET. C++ continues to exist because there is a need for it, a need that isn't and can't be fulfilled by any other language. If you stop coding and look up from your Visual Studio C# tab, you might discover there's a whole world of programming languages, IDEs and software out there. -- modified at 8:17 Monday 26th November, 2007

Boost was started by members of the C++ Standards Committee Library Working Group to rapidly create robust and efficient C++ libraries. Boost is made up of many libraries; some push the limits of template programming, others are quite simple and helpful (smart pointers for instance). A large part of the boost libraries has been added to the C++ TR1 and will be part of the standard in the future. I suppose a lot of people reinvent the wheel instead of using STL and boost. Sometimes this is justified by performance, political or technical reasons, often it is not.

I own a Pocket PC and I use it a lot for listening to audio books, reading books, keeping track of finances, notes, as a planner, a GPS and - if necessary - to go online. It cost ~300$. It's small and there are a ton of apps out there for it. Maybe if you're a .NET developer, but .NET is not well suited for embedded development; for Pocket PC you'll want to develop using MFC / Win32API.

After all these years, Microsoft has decided to accept my demands to improve C#. Now I can declare all my methods in the .h file and define them in the .cs! Looking forward to my other requests: preprocessor macros and inline x86 ASM. :suss:

It's incompetent advice. Client side validations aren't reliable, their only point is saving the user the time it takes to make the trip to the server to validate and displaying the page with the errors. If javascript is disabled or blocked, bye-bye "validations". Not validating on the server is a newbie mistake that invites all sort of exploits and errors.

I am trying Boundschecker and I was curious whether it would catch any errors: it showed 133 unrelated pointer comparisons inside the function "bool _Inside(const _Elem *_Ptr)" at the top of the stack initiated by the calls to cout. In other words, it didn't find anything. :| 1. In operator= use swap like in http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/059.htm 2. You are not reserveing space and the vector is redundantly reallocated. 2. You are calling a constant result function in the for loop test. 4. You are using post-increment in the for loop. 5. Standard header files should be included using the <> syntax, not the "" one. 6. Public data members...

Visual Assist X from Whole Tomato has some refactorings (rename, create impl., move impl. to source file, change signature) and the performance is very good. Still very few compared to what's available for C# or Java, but a start.

What design pattern(s) are you using and what programming language?