Visual Studio 20003 crap - Programmer

This is a discussion on Visual Studio 20003 crap - Programmer ; After installing the Windows Xp sp2, I could not compile an application that I have been developing with Visual C++ 6. and this is because the mororns from Microsoft have decided to basically **** up one of the best products ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Visual Studio 20003 crap

  1. Visual Studio 20003 crap

    After installing the Windows Xp sp2, I could not compile an application that
    I have
    been developing with Visual C++ 6.

    and this is because the mororns from Microsoft have decided to basically
    **** up
    one of the best products put on the market by Microsoft (Visual C++ 6).

    Just to give an example in VC6, I used to add a toolbar item to the
    mainframe toolbar
    then hold the "Ctrl" key and double click the respective toolbar Item and
    then I would add
    the handler (function) for that particular toolbar item, in the Visual
    Studio 2003 crap (the
    most expensive **** up put by Microsoft on the market), this feature is no
    longer available.

    I think is time to switch to Borland C++



  2. Re: Visual Studio 20003 crap


    RPG wrote:
    > After installing the Windows Xp sp2, I could not compile an

    application that
    > I have
    > been developing with Visual C++ 6.
    >
    > and this is because the mororns from Microsoft have decided to

    basically
    > **** up
    > one of the best products put on the market by Microsoft (Visual C++

    6).
    >
    > Just to give an example in VC6, I used to add a toolbar item to the
    > mainframe toolbar
    > then hold the "Ctrl" key and double click the respective toolbar Item

    and
    > then I would add
    > the handler (function) for that particular toolbar item, in the

    Visual
    > Studio 2003 crap (the
    > most expensive **** up put by Microsoft on the market), this feature

    is no
    > longer available.
    >
    > I think is time to switch to Borland C++


    I agree 100% and so do my co-developers who have moved from VC6 to VC7.
    I think you'll find that VC7 is more expensive than just the cost of
    the product as you have to fix problems introduced by ports. For
    example, in their wisdom, MS made CoRegisterClassObjects do a lazy
    create on Singletons. This has taken 2 people working on and off for a
    year to fix. So don't forget to add in your unforeseen development
    effort required to get ports working. My advice - don't port. Wait till
    you discover that ClassWizard has disappeared, along with DocFile
    viewer and other indispensible tools. Also hold back on your joy when
    you discover that a solution's dependency checker will compile all the
    projects irrespective of whats changed and that the new compiler allows
    you to go for dinner while it compiles a 'Hello World' program. My
    timesheet now has 6.5 hours down to my company's 'VC7 compilation'
    time code every day and 1 hour actually spent on productive
    development.


  3. Re: Visual Studio 20003 crap

    Maybe you need to restructure your Solutions - or get a faster better
    machine. I use VS .NET 2003 (VC++ 7.1) for projects large and small and
    have no problem. My largest Solution has over 15 projects and over 5,000
    files - it compiles in less than 10 minutes for a complete rebuild, and most
    compiles (with 15 dependencies) take less than 3 minutes. Smaller projects
    don't give me enough time to get out of my chair.

    --
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------


    "Headache" wrote in message
    news:1105537522.174910.132500@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
    >
    > RPG wrote:
    > > After installing the Windows Xp sp2, I could not compile an

    > application that
    > > I have
    > > been developing with Visual C++ 6.
    > >
    > > and this is because the mororns from Microsoft have decided to

    > basically
    > > **** up
    > > one of the best products put on the market by Microsoft (Visual C++

    > 6).
    > >
    > > Just to give an example in VC6, I used to add a toolbar item to the
    > > mainframe toolbar
    > > then hold the "Ctrl" key and double click the respective toolbar Item

    > and
    > > then I would add
    > > the handler (function) for that particular toolbar item, in the

    > Visual
    > > Studio 2003 crap (the
    > > most expensive **** up put by Microsoft on the market), this feature

    > is no
    > > longer available.
    > >
    > > I think is time to switch to Borland C++

    >
    > I agree 100% and so do my co-developers who have moved from VC6 to VC7.
    > I think you'll find that VC7 is more expensive than just the cost of
    > the product as you have to fix problems introduced by ports. For
    > example, in their wisdom, MS made CoRegisterClassObjects do a lazy
    > create on Singletons. This has taken 2 people working on and off for a
    > year to fix. So don't forget to add in your unforeseen development
    > effort required to get ports working. My advice - don't port. Wait till
    > you discover that ClassWizard has disappeared, along with DocFile
    > viewer and other indispensible tools. Also hold back on your joy when
    > you discover that a solution's dependency checker will compile all the
    > projects irrespective of whats changed and that the new compiler allows
    > you to go for dinner while it compiles a 'Hello World' program. My
    > timesheet now has 6.5 hours down to my company's 'VC7 compilation'
    > time code every day and 1 hour actually spent on productive
    > development.
    >




  4. Re: Visual Studio 20003 crap

    I truly can't complain about the compile time, it is faster. But I agree
    about the lack of dependency change check, it always wants to compile the
    other projects.
    I miss the Class Wizard, it was a very nice central place to manage all your
    handler functions. But at the same time I like the fact that they have
    separated out Menu commands, overrides, and WM commands in different windows
    in the property, though it does get a bit confused from time to time. Maybe
    they can combine these two in the next release.

    As far as the original posters complains, get used to right clicking alot in
    the resource editor!

    AliR.

    "Baxter" wrote in message
    news:10uaieb2runh6b1@corp.supernews.com...
    > Maybe you need to restructure your Solutions - or get a faster better
    > machine. I use VS .NET 2003 (VC++ 7.1) for projects large and small and
    > have no problem. My largest Solution has over 15 projects and over 5,000
    > files - it compiles in less than 10 minutes for a complete rebuild, and

    most
    > compiles (with 15 dependencies) take less than 3 minutes. Smaller

    projects
    > don't give me enough time to get out of my chair.
    >
    > --
    > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
    > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >
    >
    > "Headache" wrote in message
    > news:1105537522.174910.132500@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
    > >
    > > RPG wrote:
    > > > After installing the Windows Xp sp2, I could not compile an

    > > application that
    > > > I have
    > > > been developing with Visual C++ 6.
    > > >
    > > > and this is because the mororns from Microsoft have decided to

    > > basically
    > > > **** up
    > > > one of the best products put on the market by Microsoft (Visual C++

    > > 6).
    > > >
    > > > Just to give an example in VC6, I used to add a toolbar item to the
    > > > mainframe toolbar
    > > > then hold the "Ctrl" key and double click the respective toolbar Item

    > > and
    > > > then I would add
    > > > the handler (function) for that particular toolbar item, in the

    > > Visual
    > > > Studio 2003 crap (the
    > > > most expensive **** up put by Microsoft on the market), this feature

    > > is no
    > > > longer available.
    > > >
    > > > I think is time to switch to Borland C++

    > >
    > > I agree 100% and so do my co-developers who have moved from VC6 to VC7.
    > > I think you'll find that VC7 is more expensive than just the cost of
    > > the product as you have to fix problems introduced by ports. For
    > > example, in their wisdom, MS made CoRegisterClassObjects do a lazy
    > > create on Singletons. This has taken 2 people working on and off for a
    > > year to fix. So don't forget to add in your unforeseen development
    > > effort required to get ports working. My advice - don't port. Wait till
    > > you discover that ClassWizard has disappeared, along with DocFile
    > > viewer and other indispensible tools. Also hold back on your joy when
    > > you discover that a solution's dependency checker will compile all the
    > > projects irrespective of whats changed and that the new compiler allows
    > > you to go for dinner while it compiles a 'Hello World' program. My
    > > timesheet now has 6.5 hours down to my company's 'VC7 compilation'
    > > time code every day and 1 hour actually spent on productive
    > > development.
    > >

    >
    >




  5. Re: Visual Studio 20003 crap

    > I think is time to switch to Borland C++

    Why not stay with VC6 if you were comfortable with it? Why waste
    resources again?

    ----------------
    Ajay Kalra
    ajaykalra@yahoo.com


+ Reply to Thread