What a thread!!

[nlongo]

First of all, wow. I couldn't believe what I was reading in parts of this
thread.

I have developed in Java, VB and C++(MS and Non-MS). In each language I
have developed pretty extensively over the years. I'm just starting to get
involved with the whole .Net craze(I'm not the biggest fan of M$) but sometimes
you have to accept the fact that's the way the world is.

I was involved with Java from the begining and like everyone else have been
extremely frustrated with the changes from release to release, performance
problems, etc.

I have done my fair share of VB development ranging from VB Script to full
fledge applications.

My primary language is C++. Being that I've worked the whole gamut from
Application development to System level programming I can't figure out what
the one writers definition of Application developer. I particularly liked
the one comment about hiding behind fancing titles like solution provider.


The general comment made regarding C++ programmers not beging good designers
is absurd!!! There are some very horrible C++ developers and horrible VB
developers, and horrible Java developers. In reality, I think the true problem
is there are people that just shouldn't be developing.

Like another writer said, each language has it's purpose but to say C++ is
on it's way out for Application development is absurd(I think I used that
word already) Crazy!!! To argue that Internet Explorer is not an Application,
or the simple Windows Explorer is not an application is crazy(although, Windows
Explorer would be an easy VB app). There not part of the OS because they
were delivered with the OS. They're applications that make the OS usefull.

Would I immediately pick C++ when developing an ActiveX control I'm going
to place on a Web Page? Probably not but if your view of what makes an application
is something on a web page then you have really lost it.

Another writer mentioned the 20% factor of VB. I'm to familar with this.
We were trying to develop an application I considered really simple. We
had the GUI done in short order but when it came time to put some guts behind
it we were screwed. I've since learned from that mistake. If I have a product
were most of the work resides on a server or can take advantage of a database,
I'ld consider VB because when it comes to the GUI it's pretty rapid. If
I have an app that needs to have some guts behind, the time I save by using
C++ greatly out ways the time it takes me to put together some MFC classes.
The one writter kept saying VB is the glue that brings together other components(probably
written in C++) is true but if that's all your doing I don't know if I can
consider that programming. That's playing with building blocks. If you
can program, I believe you can play with building blocks, but just because
you know how to put a few blocks together doesn't mean you can program.
Now there are exceptions to this but any good programmer has got the ability
to take pre-existing pieces and combine them in different manors to make
something different.

I'm not a big promoter of Java(still to many disadvantages for the advantages
to make up for) but C# is M$'s solution to the fact that they couldn't change
Java(hence the law suite). I won't go into C# much more because I can't
claim to know all about it. It will find it's place like everything else.


I have been quoted as saying VB is powerful when used in it's intended manor
but in the realm of work I'm now in, VB is far from a solution. Try writing
an RDP(Radar Data Processor) in VB. I wouldn't even write our GUI interface
in VB because of what I need it to do. I wouldn't write any of the products
developed where I work in VB or Java. When I think of writing a VB app,
lately it's always been in the context of quickly writing a tool to aid in
my C++ development...kind of ironic. VB written in C++, my app written in
VB to help write more C++.

After reading this thread and now this long responce...I'm tired. I don't
even know how good of a responce this is. I just felt I needed to write
something.

In general, "no" C# will not replace C++ in any respect. Why, because even
if a solution could be implemented in C#, someone will do it in C++ because
C++ has survived the test of time which is something extremely valuable to
a business.

[nlongo]

This was supposed to go with the "Will C# replace C++" thread...whoops!!

[Danny Kalev]

"barknee@westrew.com" wrote:
>
> "nlongo" <nlongo@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> >C++ has survived the test of time which is something extremely valuable
> to
> >a business.
> >
>
> As valuable as money?

definitely. The fact that you don't have to throw away hundreds of
thousand of legacy code and hire new software developers to rewrite
everything from scratch in a new language is a major financial bonus.
Note that in many projects that re-implement an existing legacy
application, you often spend thousands and even millions of dollars just
to keep the business running, with no real added value.

Danny

Danny

[barknee@westrew.com]

"nlongo" <nlongo@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>
>C++ has survived the test of time which is something extremely valuable
to
>a business.
>

As valuable as money?