|
|
You're in the
visual studio .net ide
group:VS.NET Report Card
visual studio .net ide:
I would appreciate any input as to why the Edit & Continue for VS.NET does
not seem as fully functional as it was in VC++ 6.0. For example my "Output" pane disappears and I can no longer see TRACE messages following an Edit & Continue. And secondly Edit & Continue seems less able to process the change (i.e. actually do the edit - then continue on) than it was in VC++ 6.0. My recollection is that in 6.0 it was seldom the case that Edit & Continue was unable to process the edited code and continue on. Perhaps I am wrong on this. Having used VC.NET for several months now (after using VC++ for the last 10 years beginning with version 1.0), I would give in an A+ for some of the new features and A+ for fixing some of the problems/annoyances that have been with us awhile. But the changes to some features such as 'pane management, lack of a Class Wizard and being unable to tile two source files horizontally (or vertically) deserves no better than a C+. For example, I still have difficulty managing the adding of message handlers (and especially deleting them) since Class Wizard was phased out. Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" I have yet to find a decent definition. What do the rest of you think? Michael
[quoted text, click to view]
> Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" I have > yet to find a decent definition. don't-use-this-feature-because-there-is-a-newer-better-way-to-do-it-now [quoted text, click to view] Michael T wrote:
> > I would appreciate any input as to why the Edit & Continue for VS.NET does > not seem as fully functional as it was in VC++ 6.0. > > For example my "Output" pane disappears and I can no longer see TRACE > messages following an Edit & Continue. > > And secondly Edit & Continue seems less able to process the change (i.e. > actually do the edit - then continue on) than it was in VC++ 6.0. My > recollection is that in 6.0 it was seldom the case that Edit & Continue was > unable to process the edited code and continue on. Perhaps I am wrong on > this. > > Having used VC.NET for several months now (after using VC++ for the last 10 > years beginning with version 1.0), I would give in an A+ for some of the new > features and A+ for fixing some of the problems/annoyances that have been > with us awhile. > > But the changes to some features such as 'pane management, lack of a Class > Wizard and being unable to tile two source files horizontally (or > vertically) deserves no better than a C+. For example, I still have > difficulty managing the adding of message handlers (and especially deleting > them) since Class Wizard was phased out. > > Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" I have > yet to find a decent definition. > > What do the rest of you think? >
I was answering the question about what deprecated means.
Regarding e&c in vs.net -- support and functionality is weak. The current 'line' from MS and crew is "wait for whidbey", however it isn't all that clear how much better (if at all) e&c support will be. [quoted text, click to view] Francisco wrote:
> > Julie, > would you like to elaborate on how you achieve edit and continue, in vs 2003 > Francisco > > "Julie J." <unlisted@.> wrote in message news:40419267.2421EE86@.... > > > Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" I > have > > > yet to find a decent definition. > > > > don't-use-this-feature-because-there-is-a-newer-better-way-to-do-it-now > > > > > > Michael T wrote: > > > > > > I would appreciate any input as to why the Edit & Continue for VS.NET > does > > > not seem as fully functional as it was in VC++ 6.0. > > > > > > For example my "Output" pane disappears and I can no longer see TRACE > > > messages following an Edit & Continue. > > > > > > And secondly Edit & Continue seems less able to process the change (i.e. > > > actually do the edit - then continue on) than it was in VC++ 6.0. My > > > recollection is that in 6.0 it was seldom the case that Edit & Continue > was > > > unable to process the edited code and continue on. Perhaps I am wrong on > > > this. > > > > > > Having used VC.NET for several months now (after using VC++ for the last > 10 > > > years beginning with version 1.0), I would give in an A+ for some of the > new > > > features and A+ for fixing some of the problems/annoyances that have > been > > > with us awhile. > > > > > > But the changes to some features such as 'pane management, lack of a > Class > > > Wizard and being unable to tile two source files horizontally (or > > > vertically) deserves no better than a C+. For example, I still have > > > difficulty managing the adding of message handlers (and especially > deleting > > > them) since Class Wizard was phased out. > > > > > > Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" I > have > > > yet to find a decent definition. > > > > > > What do the rest of you think? > > >
Julie,
would you like to elaborate on how you achieve edit and continue, in vs 2003 Francisco [quoted text, click to view] "Julie J." <unlisted@.> wrote in message news:40419267.2421EE86@.... > > Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" I have > > yet to find a decent definition. > > don't-use-this-feature-because-there-is-a-newer-better-way-to-do-it-now > > > Michael T wrote: > > > > I would appreciate any input as to why the Edit & Continue for VS.NET does > > not seem as fully functional as it was in VC++ 6.0. > > > > For example my "Output" pane disappears and I can no longer see TRACE > > messages following an Edit & Continue. > > > > And secondly Edit & Continue seems less able to process the change (i.e. > > actually do the edit - then continue on) than it was in VC++ 6.0. My > > recollection is that in 6.0 it was seldom the case that Edit & Continue was > > unable to process the edited code and continue on. Perhaps I am wrong on > > this. > > > > Having used VC.NET for several months now (after using VC++ for the last 10 > > years beginning with version 1.0), I would give in an A+ for some of the new > > features and A+ for fixing some of the problems/annoyances that have been > > with us awhile. > > > > But the changes to some features such as 'pane management, lack of a Class > > Wizard and being unable to tile two source files horizontally (or > > vertically) deserves no better than a C+. For example, I still have > > difficulty managing the adding of message handlers (and especially deleting > > them) since Class Wizard was phased out. > > > > Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" I have > > yet to find a decent definition. > > > > What do the rest of you think? > > > > Michael
[quoted text, click to view]
"Michael T" <anonymous@nospam-att.net> wrote: > But the changes to some features such as 'pane management, lack of a > Class Wizard and being unable to tile two source files horizontally > (or vertically) deserves no better than a C+. You can get the old MDI behavior through Tools/Options/Environment/General. Select "MDI environment" and it should be similar to or just like VC6 for tiling windows, etc. [quoted text, click to view] > For example, I still > have difficulty managing the adding of message handlers (and > especially deleting them) since Class Wizard was phased out. You've no doubt discovered that it is to be done through Properties now. I'm not a big-time MFC guy, so it hasn't affected me greatly, but in the few MFC projects I've done, I found the new method workable enough. I quit using some of the new features because they would create bogus/incorrect code (such as adding a variable to a class). Once I find a feature misbehaving, I quit using it, otherwise I must always remember to go back and check that it was done correctly. Might as well do it myself when it gets that way, and know that it's right. Imagine a text editor that, 1 out of every 10 times, didn't save your file correctly. You'd soon quit using it, wouldn't you? That's exactly how I feel about some of the features in VS.NET. They might work 9 out of 10 times, but it's not worth the trouble of always having to check if this was that one time that it won't perform correctly. [quoted text, click to view] > Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" > I have yet to find a decent definition. Questions such as this have been deprecated in this forum :-) --
[quoted text, click to view]
"harry_bosch" <harry@bosch.org> wrote in message news:Xns949E6F88D1C4Bhboschez@207.46.248.16... won't perform correctly. > > > Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" > > I have yet to find a decent definition. > > Questions such as this have been deprecated in this forum :-) > > -- > harry I got a good chuckle. Seriously though, it would have been helpful if when you highlight "warning C4996" (see error message below) - then press the F1 key to access the Help file there would have been a definition for 'deprecated'. warning C4996: 'CWinApp::Enable3dControlsStatic' was declared deprecated Oh well I still find this IDE makes my job oh so pleasant. Especially since I work with several embedded developers (which I used to be in the 1980s) who don't have near the robust environment. Finally - kudos to you and Julie for the feedback. Michael
[quoted text, click to view]
"Michael T" <anonymous@nospam-att.net> wrote: > Seriously though, it would have been helpful if when you highlight > "warning C4996" (see error message below) - then press the F1 key to > access the Help file there would have been a definition for > 'deprecated'. It seems to be a term that has been accepted industry-wide, so we're all supposed to know what it means :-) Actually, I think a good dictionary would help someone work out what it does mean, with the warning that the tech industry often borrows terms and does not use them in their original sense. One might have to work out some examples for a while before some terms clicked (but I think the standard definition of 'deprecated' is not so far off). I have another one: what on earth is "pragma" supposed to mean? :-) --
It is supposed to bring you calm and good fortune -- but only if you know
how to use it :) Francisco [quoted text, click to view] "harry_bosch" <harry@bosch.org> wrote in message news:Xns949F9DCC647D2hboschez@207.46.248.16... > "Michael T" <anonymous@nospam-att.net> wrote: > > > Seriously though, it would have been helpful if when you highlight > > "warning C4996" (see error message below) - then press the F1 key to > > access the Help file there would have been a definition for > > 'deprecated'. > > It seems to be a term that has been accepted industry-wide, so we're all > supposed to know what it means :-) Actually, I think a good dictionary > would help someone work out what it does mean, with the warning that the > tech industry often borrows terms and does not use them in their original > sense. One might have to work out some examples for a while before some > terms clicked (but I think the standard definition of 'deprecated' is not > so far off). > > I have another one: what on earth is "pragma" supposed to mean? :-) > > -- > harry
Only native E&C is supported in VS03, but Whidbey will provide E&C for
managed code. [quoted text, click to view] "Julie" <julie@aol.com> wrote in message news:404210D8.8A2D8EDE@aol.com... > I was answering the question about what deprecated means. > > Regarding e&c in vs.net -- support and functionality is weak. The current > 'line' from MS and crew is "wait for whidbey", however it isn't all that clear > how much better (if at all) e&c support will be. > > Francisco wrote: > > > > Julie, > > would you like to elaborate on how you achieve edit and continue, in vs 2003 > > Francisco > > > > "Julie J." <unlisted@.> wrote in message news:40419267.2421EE86@.... > > > > Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" I > > have > > > > yet to find a decent definition. > > > > > > don't-use-this-feature-because-there-is-a-newer-better-way-to-do-it-now > > > > > > > > > Michael T wrote: > > > > > > > > I would appreciate any input as to why the Edit & Continue for VS.NET > > does > > > > not seem as fully functional as it was in VC++ 6.0. > > > > > > > > For example my "Output" pane disappears and I can no longer see TRACE > > > > messages following an Edit & Continue. > > > > > > > > And secondly Edit & Continue seems less able to process the change (i.e. > > > > actually do the edit - then continue on) than it was in VC++ 6.0. My > > > > recollection is that in 6.0 it was seldom the case that Edit & Continue > > was > > > > unable to process the edited code and continue on. Perhaps I am wrong on > > > > this. > > > > > > > > Having used VC.NET for several months now (after using VC++ for the last > > 10 > > > > years beginning with version 1.0), I would give in an A+ for some of the > > new > > > > features and A+ for fixing some of the problems/annoyances that have > > been > > > > with us awhile. > > > > > > > > But the changes to some features such as 'pane management, lack of a > > Class > > > > Wizard and being unable to tile two source files horizontally (or > > > > vertically) deserves no better than a C+. For example, I still have > > > > difficulty managing the adding of message handlers (and especially > > deleting > > > > them) since Class Wizard was phased out. > > > > > > > > Finally as a humorous aside "What in the world does deprecated mean?" I > > have > > > > yet to find a decent definition. > > > > > > > > What do the rest of you think? > > > > > > > > Michael
"> But the changes to some features such as 'pane management, lack of a
Class [quoted text, click to view] > Wizard and being unable to tile two source files horizontally (or > vertically) deserves no better than a C+. As someone else pointed out you can get the old MDI interface back if you want, but you can also get similar, but more flexible behavior using tabbed views. Simply drag a tab out of the window it's in and you create a new docking window, either below, or along side. You can then drag other tabs into that window. I find it handy to to have a window containing tabs for the .h files and another window for the .cpp files. Much easier than shuffling MDI windows around.
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
| home · blog · groups | Questions? Comments? Contact the dn |