Have any of you worked with Visual C++?

[357mag 2]

I remember back around 1997 or so when I was working with Microsoft Visual Basic 6 I wanted to try their other product, Visual C++ 6. But when I looked at some of the code it looked like a scary nightmare. I guess I was expecting it

to look kinda like standard C++ but it looked way different with all kinds of different terminology and it was way over my head. Right around the same time I found out about this product called Borland C++ 4 Standard so I bought

that and just made console programs with it.

 

I'd like to ask you guys if you have worked with Microsoft's Visual C++.

 

Did you like it or hate it?

Edited May 27, 2023 by 357mag

[Fr0sT.Brutal 897]

Worked a little.

Hate it, just like I hate any C++ and additional stuff from VС itself

 

[David Heffernan 2290]

It's basically just another C++ compiler. But maybe what you are actually asking is abkut MSVC with thr Visual Studio IDE. And people's experiences probably differ hugely depending on what type of software they are developing. 

[David Schwartz 413]

I got Borland's Turbo C++ and then Borland C++ and used them for many years.

 

Microsoft's approach to C++ was very off-putting, to put it politely. They basically drove all of the C compiler vendors out of business except Borland, then put out this stinky POS that they called "C++" but it was really "C with classes". It sucked. They always had to go their own way. Their representative on the C++ standard's committee kept trying to push stuff into the proposal that MS wanted but was really off-base, and I think he finally just stopped participating because of all the flack his proposals attracted.

 

I looked at their C++ platform now and then, and it just made me want to gag. I was getting burned-out on C++ around the time Delphi was introduced, and within 2 years I had switched entirely to Delphi, and I've never really looked back.

[David Heffernan 2290]

3 hours ago, David Schwartz said:

Their representative on the C++ standard's committee kept trying to push stuff into the proposal that MS wanted but was really off-base, and I think he finally just stopped participating because of all the flack his proposals attracted.

This was a very long time ago, if your story is even true.

 

Herb Sutter has been with MS since early 2000s.

 

There's really not much to be gained by raking over the MS of yesteryear. 

[Der schöne Günther 306]

On 5/27/2023 at 7:46 AM, 357mag said:

look kinda like standard C++ but it looked way different with all kinds of different terminology and it was way over my head

Do you, by chance, not mean C++, but C++/CX by Microsoft?

[357mag 2]

No Visual C++ as it comes in Visual Studio and when it was available as a separate product in a box called Visual C++ 6. It was MFC which looked very difficult to monkey with or learn. Now we have WPF and WinForms so maybe it's not so bad. But I 

don't think Microsoft really wants programmers to use it. They are pushing Visual C#.

[David Heffernan 2290]

MFC was kinda gnarly. Macro hell. VCL was far superior.

 

I don't think the visual moniker does much. Visual C#. What does that even mean. It's C#. 

 

I wouldn't say MS are pushing C# over C++. They each have their niches. 

 

You still haven't said what sort programming you are doing. It makes a huge difference to what language, tools and libraries you use. Often the target libraries are a more important considation than language. 

 

Why are you even interested in C++ anyway? And why the MS compiler rather than GCC or Clang? 

[Roger Cigol 88]

Twenty five or so years ago I took on maintenance / on going development of a large C++ project based on MS Visual C++ and MFC (version 6).  I got the customer's main issues sorted out over a couple of years and in doing so got to know the ins and outs of Visual C++ /MFC 6.0. The customer got confidence in me then and I suggested migrating to Borland C++ Builder / VCL version 6.0 . This took another year to get done. I am still supporting and developing this product for the same customer and it's now on Embarcadero C++ 11 and we are about to change to a 64bit based version of the software..... This is (one of the reasons) why I am really excited and pleased about David Millington's recent blog about the Embarcadero future direction for clang C++....

[357mag 2]

The Visual in Visual Basic or Visual C++ or Visual C# simply means you can make a Graphical Interface with it. You're working in a visual manner instead of in a console manner (although you can do that too).

[David Heffernan 2290]

1 hour ago, 357mag said:

The Visual in Visual Basic or Visual C++ or Visual C# simply means you can make a Graphical Interface with it.

It was a marketing gimmick 15-20 years ago but it's meaningless now and not even used by MS. 

 

We still have no idea what sort of programming you are interested in, what libraries matter to you, and why the MS compiler as opposed to any others. 

[357mag 2]

I like console programming. But I also like beginning Windows programming which is what I have already started using C# and C++ Builder. One of the more adventourous programs I would like to build is a 10 question music test or a 10 question psychology test. I want it to ask a question and then the user will give his answer to the question and then hit the Next button and the next question appears. It will be multiple choice so I will be using radio buttons I imagine. I'm wondering if I would need to use 10 different forms to represent the 10 questions, or is there a way to to continue to use just one form for all 10 questions.

 

I like bouncing around too between languages. 

 

Microsoft Visual C++ when I found out what it was like turned me off, but I have often looked into it again but each time I say No Thanks. Curiosity.

 

 

Edited May 31, 2023 by 357mag

[David Heffernan 2290]

I'd say C++ is definitely not suited to this programming. 

[Roger Cigol 88]

.... and I'd knock this out very quickly using Embarcadero C++ and VCL. You could use radio buttons as you say (the correct native choice) and you would use the same form and just populate the text next to each radio button with the multiple choice answer. A Delphi fan would be equally at home doing the same with Delphi and VCL. Or use Firemonkey if you want to target mobile devices. Actually there is very little code required here - it's mostly visual layout stuff. So the choice of language is not a major decision. Pick the one you are most familiar with (if you want to get it done quickly) or pick the one you want to learn if getting new skills is what you are after....

[David Schwartz 413]

On 5/29/2023 at 11:04 PM, David Heffernan said:

This was a very long time ago, if your story is even true.

 

Herb Sutter has been with MS since early 2000s.

 

There's really not much to be gained by raking over the MS of yesteryear. 

The first C++ Standard was passed in 1997 (dated 1998), which was apparently before Herb's time there. The OP seemed to be asking about older versions of C++ from that time period (VB6)

 

Quote

 

I remember back around 1997 or so when I was working with Microsoft Visual Basic 6 I wanted to try their other product, Visual C++ 6. But when I looked at some of the code it looked like a scary nightmare. I guess I was expecting it to look kinda like standard C++ but it looked way different with all kinds of different terminology

 

There's a very good reason for that -- it's because MS went in a different direction and tried their best to get the C++ Standards committe to embrace it. Talking about that is not "raking over" anything. It's just what's so about C++ back before it was a standard (early 1990's) and MS was still trying to make the world follow their lead. Thankfully the C++ Standards committee was not persuaded by MS' efforts.

 

MS took what they called an "object based" approach, and had this large and gnarly library of macros (MFC) that ran with their C compiler that you needed to use to build apps for Windows at the time. Gates gave some talks at conferences about how "leading edge" their "object-based approach" was and how it would revolutionize programming -- LOL. All it did was drive lots and lots of small consulting companies into bankruptcy because you had to spend $3000 to attend a "certification class" to get full access to their tools allowing you to write stuff for Windows that was "certified". It took about a year to come up to speed, whereupon MS would announce a new version that everybody was again required to pay to learn and use. I avoided it like the plague and focused on embedded systems, most of which used DOS.

 

The thing that made jaws drop at the Delphi introduction event (I was there!) was that Borland demostrated something that basically spat in Bill's face by making the whole Windows Message Loop totally DISAPPEAR! Programmers no longer needed to use that horrid "object-based" macro library with MSVC to write Windows apps. And the coup de grâce was that Delphi let you extend it by writing component libraries IN DELPHI ITSELF rather than requiring a totally different language and compiler, the way VB did (it required you to write its components in MSVC using that ugly macro library).

 

I saw Delphi's introduction as an inflection point in Microsoft's approach to software development. A year after Delphi was introduced, they hired Anders (one of the key Delphi devs) to come in and change their direction by finally embracing real object-oriented programming instead of that stupid "object-based" approach they spent so much time and effort crowing about. Delphi also presented MS with the first serious competitor to their whole MSVC+Macros approach to Windows programming, which is a big reason why Delphi adoption took off so quickly. Curiously, MS stopped requiring people to attend their $3000 training course to get the tools needed to do Windows development. (Delphi was the cheaper option, if you can imagine that!) And in 1997, the C++ Standards Committee passed the first C++ Standard that had NONE of the stuff in it that MS lobbied so long and hard to get.

 

 

 

Edited May 31, 2023 by David Schwartz

[David Heffernan 2290]

That's all very nice. It's 2023 now though.