MS targets standards compliance with new Visual C++

[Zombie9920]

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002Oct/gee20021022016907.htm

[Calum]

(Calum posts the contents of the links he visits as he crawls the web, so you don't have to!    )

quote:NEWS
In a surprising move, Microsoft has pledged that its next version of Visual Studio .NET will contain an ISO/ANSI-compliant version of Visual C++ .NET. Codenamed Everett and set for release in early 2003, the new Visual Studio .NET version will aim for a score of 90+ compliance with the C++ standard. Microsoft has never been a stickler for standards in the past, instead aiming for speed on the Windows platform rather than sticking to the rules.

Microsoft's C# (C-sharp) and Common Language Infrastructure (CLI) have also moved to the International Standards Association (ISO) after gaining approval from the European Computer Manufacturers Association (ECMA).

The reason for this sudden rally for compliance is mainly because it is in Microsoft's interests. The ISO is a safe bet in terms of standards and changes, as there are never any major upheavals; so, tools built around the standard are likely to remain unproblematic. Microsoft can use this to its benefit and offer some comfort to companies building software using MS tools and software as a base. Microsoft has also identified that its customers are becoming more proficient and using more of the advanced features contained in the ISO/ANSI standard. Current Microsoft tools do not support all of these features.

Quick fixes have been used to bridge the gap left by the lack of compliance in the past. The release of Everett will try to eradicate these problems and make Microsoft's tools more attractive. Many remain skeptical, however, based on the Redmond giant's past performance.

Read more in the ComputerWire article.


MATTHEW'S OPINION
This seems as much of a marketing ploy as a change of direction. Microsoft has been struggling to get its .NET platform established as a major player ... this seems like the latest tactic to get developers on board. Customers are asking why Microsoft tools won't do what the ISO standard allows--this is a very quick way to lose your customer base. Deciding to adopt the standard gives Microsoft time to either bring Visual C++. NET in line with the ISO standards, or at least implement everything that is currently missing.

Genuine as this may be, a 90 score is a big leap from a 60, and I am sure many believe Microsoft won't do it. The ComputerWire article has comments from industry players stating it will be a version of Visual C++ with the .NET name, while others are more hopeful. Even if Microsoft does achieve ISO compliance there is no guarantee it will keep Visual C++ compliant in the future. If a need is identified that is not part of ISO or if ISO decides on a change that Microsoft does not like, then it is unlikely MS will comply. After all, this approach has worked in the past: Visual C++ got only a 60 for compliance, yet it was one of the most popular compilers available.

We'll have to wait and see what Everett turns out to be next year.

USER COMMENTS 10 comment(s)

others (9:22am EST Tue Oct 22 2002)
what do other compilers score? microsoft cant be the only one not 100% supporting the ISO standard.
- by brad

Bait and Switch (9:32am EST Tue Oct 22 2002)
As someone who has programmed applications using Microsoft technologies before, I can't trust them. They have in the past made changes that require extensive rewrites in order to migrate to different versions, and many of these changes make no sense and seem like a step backward.

This is just another ploy to get you to adopt their products, then make changes to require you to fork over more money. This has hapened too many times now and i am never going to "rely" on Microsoft again, i will always try to keep one foot out the door.
- by Vegimon

Just out of curiosity (9:42am EST Tue Oct 22 2002)
Where does the cpp that ships with Redhat 8 score?

- by DeafDude

Microsoft should submit Visual Basic to ISO/ANSI (10:37am EST Tue Oct 22 2002)
How many angry Visual Basic programmers out there? When Microsoft switched to .net, many of the old Visual Basic programs did not work. Many of Visual Basic command were changed sometimes for no good reason. Now if only Visual Basic was submitted to ISO/ANSI, Visual Basic would stabilize. Too bad, Microsoft, Visual Basic popularity is dropping fast. - by Not a VB programmer

Vegimon (11:02am EST Tue Oct 22 2002)
Don't quite get your point, "they make changes requiring you to fork over more money"? What do you mean. My company's software will not compile on VS.Net because of the changes they have made to the compiler. So, we are not forking over any money by upgrading to VS.Net.
The bottom line is, if you want to develop applications on the Windows platform, Visual Studio is the wayt to go. Why use a 3rd party compiler just because it is 100% ISO complient, just to have to bend over backwards when it comes time to trying to use Windows technologies in your application when the 3rd party development tool doesn't support THEM 100%. I would rather not program with a 100% ISO compliant compiler if it meant using a better tool for developing applications on the Windows platform. I can only see Microsoft making Visual C++ ISO complient to it can become a defacto standard for people developing on multiple platforms, like Windows and Linux.

As for Visual Basic, this is not a real programming language, it is a little more then a scripting language. The changes Microsoft has been making to VB is to make it more a real programming language, which VB "programmers" can't handle. I think Microsoft would love to drop VB in favour of C# anyways, so I don't think they are too concerned. - by Topher

.NET advantages outweigh problems (11:08am EST Tue Oct 22 2002)
I was pretty shocked when I first migrated from VS6 to VS.NET , but I got over it. The features and the strengths added by the .NET framework FAR outweigh the minor difficulties in adjusting. For the most part, all my existing software will remain in VB/VC++ (unless there's and advantage to conversion), but any new projects I will definitely push .NET. By the looks of things, even Borland and Perl are going embracing the .NET framework. As long as MS keeps their freaking hands out of it, perhaps we'll see some decent .NET RAS tools for Mac and Linux. That would be a dream come true. For now, I guess Kylix will do for Linux, and I'll stay away from Mac programming entirely (unless they get a decent RAS). - by .Netted

Dear Topher (11:15am EST Tue Oct 22 2002)

"...it (VB) is little more than a scripting language."

Wrong.

- by Old Guy

BTW Topher (11:15am EST Tue Oct 22 2002)
I there's no reason for MS to de-support VB.NET. There are more win32 programmers developing in VB than any other language (Delphi as a close second) I personally prefer C++ for speed issues, but I've done extensibe testing and have found the C# and VB can offer the EXACT same functionality at the EXACT same speed. Plus If I write code that contains classes written in both languages, I can use them and compile them together. So those losers who ONLY use VB can still prite good code (once they learn VB.NET) and I can use the code in my .NET projects seamlessly. Granted, ANSI C++ is still almost twice as fast as well written C#, but hell, if your going to develop for windows, you might as well take advantage of the features . . . the speed issues isn't that horrible bad. - by .Netted

But Topher did have a point... (11:31am EST Tue Oct 22 2002)
when he said:
I think Microsoft would love to drop VB in favour of C# anyways, so I don't think they are too concerned. - by dude

Compliance has been planned for years (11:49am EST Tue Oct 22 2002)
They've been planning to do this since VC 5.0/6.0 days, but the compiler team was too busy. Now with Managed C++ for .NET out the door, they finally have time to do what the core C++ customers have been asking for. - by David

----------------------------------

Post your comment

[Calum]

well for my part, i won't be using this compiler. did anybody make any mention of how much it cost? i have gcc 2.95, 2.96 and 3.2 (as far as i know) and they didn't cost me a penny.

[Crunchy(Cracked)Butter]

I took up a programming course and made sure it wasn't by MS so i wouldn't get fucked around and told that an MSCE is something to be proud of.  An MSCE is worth nothing if NOT working with a windows environment.

Thats why i took up Java2 instead and so far its been all free, software, teaching, the on.y thing i have had to pay for is a book off Amazon for