Re: [GD-Windows] Visual C++ .Net

[Kent Q. <ken...@co...>]

You'd better read the whole article. They're not including all that
stuff in VC7, but in the next release, which is probably more than a
year away.

Yes, they've got Lippman, so there's at least a hope, but the article is
full of wishy-washy statements about how committed they are to
supporting a compliant version of the compiler. For example:

	"There are a couple of features of the ANSI/ISO standard (for=20
	instance the =91export=92 keyword as applied to template classes)=20
	that won=92t be implemented because they are considered by=20
	Microsoft to be obscure and, at this stage, theoretical. "

	"The emphasis is on a level of compliance that allows popular=20
	libraries to be compiled, not 100% compliance."

In other words, MS is still of the attitude that THEY get to decide what
the standard should be, not standards committees or customers.

And then there's this winner:

	"Microsoft=92s approach to adding new features is whether those=20
	features are=20

		a) being used in code that other compilers can=20
		build, or=20
		b) whether those features are compelling enough=20
		that it becomes apparent that their customers=20
		want them. =20

	Microsoft will not simply implement features because they=20
	are specified in the standard.  They will implement them=20
	when people want them because they are beneficial."

I'd believe that a whole lot more if it weren't for the fact that the
entire Windows C++ community has been screaming for better template
support for several YEARS now and MSVC 7 doesn't have it.

This article reads to me like a softball interview by a captive
journalist who's dying for an excuse to say that MS has finally got
religion on C++.

Like you, I'm frustrated. I'd really much rather have a compliant
compiler from MS so I wouldn't have to trade off that for clean support
of the Windows environment. But I'd summarize the Lippman article as:

	"Please don't leave. We'll get it right* someday*."
			(*terms defined by Microsoft)

	Kent

Matt Davies wrote:
>=20
> For the last few years, I've really liked Microsoft - they are simply t=
he
> best developer supporters in the world for me.  However, I have been re=
ally
> frustrated with the lack of information regarding the conformance of th=
e C++
> standards for templates (i.e. partial template specialisation etc.) but=
 that
> quote has rekindled my complete faith in Microsoft as a company that
> listens.  I have been messing around with Boost and Loki for a while no=
w as
> well as doing my own stuff but have been forced to use Borland C++ to d=
o
> this.  I just hope the VisualC I've been waiting for comes soon.
>=20
> Matt Davies
> Programmer, Confounding Factor
> ma...@co...
> www.confounding-factor.com
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gam...@li...
> [mailto:gam...@li...]On Behalf Of
> Rich
> Sent: 22 January 2002 20:52
> To: gam...@li...
> Subject: Re: [GD-Windows] Visual C++ .Net
>=20
> In article <E0B4F5A89A36D5118FD700105A120D3904BEF1@EXCHANGE>,
>     Nathan Rausch <Nat...@te...>  writes:
>=20
> > As far as Microsoft is concerned, 95 is dead and buried. 98 and NT4 a=
re
> just
> > around the corner as well.
>=20
> Personally I can't wait for NT4 to die ;-)
>=20
> > As far as VS.net goes, what does it have to offer us who don't use
> > ATL/Wizards/Whamadoodles9.5 or whatever else they decided to stick on=
?
>=20
> (As an aside, ATL's smart COM pointer class is quite handy even if you
> never use anything else from ATL.)
>=20
> > Things like partial template specialization, better template support =
in
> > general, and better conformance to the C++ standard are really what
> interest
> > me the most. Microsoft's site is pretty barren in this area. I'd be s=
old
> if
> > it could compile Blitz++ ;)
>=20
> Yes, I think Blitz is one of the things specifically they say they are
> targetting for support.  The template support is much improved.  MS
> just hired Stanley Lippman (of "C++ Primer" fame, among others) as the
> main architect guy for VC++.  There is an interview with him on the
> Visual C++ home page.
> <http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/default.asp>
>=20
> I quote from that interview:
>=20
>     "Microsoft is however working to ensure that Visual C++ will
>     compile the most popular libraries such as Boost, Blitz, Loki and
>     a fully compliant version of STL. The emphasis is on a level of
>     compliance that allows popular libraries to be compiled, not 100%
>     compliance."
>=20
> I recommend reading the whole interview for the proper context of that
> last statement.
> --
> Ask me about my upcoming book on Direct3D from Addison-Wesley!
>   Direct3D Book <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/>
>     Don't Support Spammers!  Boycott Fractal Painter 7!
>      <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/spammers.html>
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Gamedevlists-windows mailing list
> Gam...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-windows
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Gamedevlists-windows mailing list
> Gam...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-windows

--=20
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kent Quirk                   | MindRover: "Astonishingly creative."
Game Architect               | Check it out!
ken...@co...      | http://www.mindrover.com/
_____________________________|_________________________________________