Re: Visual C++ wont autcomplete?
"Daniel James" <wastebasket@nospam.aaisp.org> wrote in message
news:VA.00001148.0a94492a@nospam.aaisp.org...
In article news:<UAJvi.3356$i85.1046@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>, David Ching
wrote:
Most of your objections are on the philosophical level.
No, Joe's objections are on a practical level. His analysis of Microsoft's
reasoning in coming up with such an unproductive IDE when their previous
IDE
had been much better is that their thinking was on a philosophical level.
That's quite different.
VS6 was better. VS2005 is (barely) adequate. People do real work in it.
End of story.
I hope it's not the end of the story. I would like the next chapter to say
that Microsoft realized that their IDE had been found wanting and actually
did
something about it. If we don't tell them how bad we thing VS2005 is, and
tell
them so loudly and repeatedly, they're going to think we're happy with it.
It
is important to clamour for an improvement as often and as noisily as
possible, here and elsewhere. Don't be complacent!
I hear VS2008 is supposed to be an improvement, but I'll believe it when I
see
it.
Hi Daniel, well... I think everything we're discussing now has been
discussed over the years. My point is, enough already. The only thing we
as users can do is make MS realize how bad it is. We have done so. And
still they have not listened. The folks that matter don't even read this
newsgroup, the http://forums.microsoft.com is a much better place to discuss
such things. The fact the *same* people *still* talk about it means to me
they are more interested in telliing the world their woes than in effecting
change. The only thing that will effect change is the market. When someone
comes up with a competitive product (and it could be Eclipse, or Borland, or
SharpDevelop, or whoever), then people will buy it. I wish people like Joe
would stop complaining and start writing one. There is a real market
opportunity here, the same as when MS hoisted the Programmers Waste Basket
on us back in the late 1980's. We'll see if any one rises to the occasion.
If the complainers stop complaining and get to developing, they may have
success! :-)
I like Borland's products, but their compiler has lagged well behind on
standards compliance and their VCL GUI library is written in Pascal (not,
in
itself, a bad thing ... but a single-vendor solution that would have no
future
if the vendor went down). I don't see it as a truly viable one-box
alternative
to Visual Studio.
For many Windows applications, standards are unnecessary (and bad when they
slow down the compiler). As long as the VCL source code would be made
available, it really doesn't matter if the company goes under or not. MS
has essentially abandoned things like WTL, ATL Server, etc. by placing it in
open source. Many .NET libraries don't come with source code either (unlike
MFC ones).
I haven't used Eclipse, but I don't see anyone defecting from VS2005 in
order to use it.
That's not the point ... I see people using Visual Studio BUT using
Eclipse to
do much of their editing ... just as people use 3rd-party commercial
source-code editors like Epsilon and Visual Slick Edit. People who code in
Qt
may use Qt designer to design the GUI (i.e. to do the job that VS's
wizards
do) and then edit the non-GUI code in VS or another editor. These people
will
still be using Visual Studio's compilation tools so what we're seeing id
not a
defection, it's simply the use of external tools to work around the
deficiencies of a sub-optimal IDE.
I've used Eclipse for Java work, but not C++. It's a nice editor but a
HUGE
resource-hog.
That's a good one... using Eclipse as an editor! But no one besides Joe
complains about VS text editing.
In fact, most cross platform people I know develop for Windows because
the
(barely adequate, by our standards) VS2005 is so much better than
anything
else out there.
Cross-platform people don't develop "for Windows" ... they develop for
multiple platforms. They may develop "on Windows", but that's another
story.
I'm sure Visual Studio is superior to one or more of the alternatives in
any
given respect -- the integrated debugging in VS is certainly the best I've
seen (but that's true of VS98/VC6 as well as VS2005, so this is not an
argument for VS2005's superiority).
It's an argument that people exagerate VS2005's demise relative to other
crappy products on the market today.
-- David