Visual Studio 2012 !
closed account (3hM2Nwbp)
http://www.ianquigley.com/A75_New_features_of_VS2012_revealed.html
*which item did you get to before it hit you?
*which item did you get to before it hit you?
Last edited on
The sad part is that Netbeans has had all of this since version 2.72.
-Albatross
-Albatross
Last edited on
I have to say that "Advanced copy and pasting of code" seems pretty interesting. Definitely looking forward to VS '12.
Off-topic:
Having been a member of this forum for close to 9 months, I get the feeling that most people for some reason don't like Visual Studio; and I honestly cannot put my finger on the why.
From what I've read on different forums, it seems VS lacks in support for C++ and I work mostly with the ASP.NET framework with C#. Is that it?
Off-topic:
Having been a member of this forum for close to 9 months, I get the feeling that most people for some reason don't like Visual Studio; and I honestly cannot put my finger on the why.
From what I've read on different forums, it seems VS lacks in support for C++ and I work mostly with the ASP.NET framework with C#. Is that it?
The other sad part is that half of those things probably really are on the pending features list...
I can see the PR official now: "Don't be ridiculous - there's no Evil Code Monkey. It's Evil Code Clippy."
And isn't automatic code correction a slippery slope to self destruction? ;)
I can see the PR official now: "Don't be ridiculous - there's no Evil Code Monkey. It's Evil Code Clippy."
And isn't automatic code correction a slippery slope to self destruction? ;)
Last edited on
closed account (3hM2Nwbp)
I personally prefer visual studio to any other IDE.
1) It works out of the box (no setting paths, setting up a compiler, etc) : click -> Done
2) The compiler (that works without any user-configuration changes) supports more of the C++0x features that I frequently use than other compilers.
3) The VS compiler didn't give me link errors when building boost::thread ! ! !
4) The Intellisense imo ( when it's working correctly ;P ) trumps all others except Visual Assist ($$$).
5) In my experience it's been more stable than alternatives...but then again, the alternatives were all used on a Linux dual-boot setup that seemed to freeze up every now and again.
6) The debugger is extremely intuitive.
I haven't even used 95% of VS's features, however.
This was my personal experience, it might not necessarily be the same in other people's cases...but I'm sold despite how many shortcomings it has.
1) It works out of the box (no setting paths, setting up a compiler, etc) : click -> Done
2) The compiler (that works without any user-configuration changes) supports more of the C++0x features that I frequently use than other compilers.
3) The VS compiler didn't give me link errors when building boost::thread ! ! !
4) The Intellisense imo ( when it's working correctly ;P ) trumps all others except Visual Assist ($$$).
5) In my experience it's been more stable than alternatives...but then again, the alternatives were all used on a Linux dual-boot setup that seemed to freeze up every now and again.
6) The debugger is extremely intuitive.
I haven't even used 95% of VS's features, however.
This was my personal experience, it might not necessarily be the same in other people's cases...but I'm sold despite how many shortcomings it has.
Last edited on
@Luc I very much agree with you. I have always thought that Intellisense in VS is very good, though Code::Block Smartsense is not bad now. While Intellisense breaks from time to time, so does Smartsense.
Lol the sad thing is I actually believed most of this...
Until I saw Evil Code Monkey. Which made me think: This can't be true, and why would Microsoft not use Bing instead of Google?"
Then it hit me. -.-
Until I saw Evil Code Monkey. Which made me think: This can't be true, and why would Microsoft not use Bing instead of Google?"
Then it hit me. -.-
Exactly. As soon as I read "Google it!" it became clear. The one right after that cemented it. Too amusing to be something a compiler would actually do.
closed account (zb0S216C)
Personally, I tend to question news that was released about a product that isn't from the product's manufacturer themselves. In this case, it's Visual C/C++ Express/Studio, and Microsoft.
That aside, why skip the 2011 version? After all, it is 2011.
Wazzak
That aside, why skip the 2011 version? After all, it is 2011.
Wazzak
Well the versions have been 2003, 2005, 2008, 2010. They don't release every year (sadly...).
That said, I agree with you on your other point. The article didn't exude integrity ;)
That said, I agree with you on your other point. The article didn't exude integrity ;)
Maybe it's just me, but I usually read comments before I read the actual posting.
@Luc Lieber
Don't forget about Unit Testing.
@Framework
A lot of times, developers working on a specific product will give early information about a particular product. Marketing wise, it's a pretty good idea, especially if it's not official, so the community can get fired up.
@Luc Lieber
Don't forget about Unit Testing.
@Framework
A lot of times, developers working on a specific product will give early information about a particular product. Marketing wise, it's a pretty good idea, especially if it's not official, so the community can get fired up.
Heh, the first one sounded believable (if strange), but starting from the second one it was obvious.
| 1) It works out of the box (no setting paths, setting up a compiler, etc) : click -> Done |
So does Code::Blocks or Qt Creator.
| 2) The compiler (that works without any user-configuration changes) supports more of the C++0x features that I frequently use than other compilers. |
What are those mysterious C++0x features that you use?
GCC's C++0x support is by far the most complete to date.
See http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C%2B%2B0xCompilerSupport
| 3) The VS compiler didn't give me link errors when building boost::thread ! ! ! |
Neither does g++.
ACK on 4)-6).
Last edited on
| GCC's C++0x support |
I had always though MSVC was good for C++0x, then I came across one of the comparison tables, and I have to say I was shocked at how little VC supported.
Mind you, Microsoft are bringing out an AMP extension...
Last edited on
closed account (3hM2Nwbp)
| 1) It works out of the box (no setting paths, setting up a compiler, etc) : click -> Done So does Code::Blocks or Qt Creator. |
In theory...
In reality, my code::blocks install auto-detected an incorrect mingw installation directory on my Windows setup. It did however install correctly on the Unbuntu system.
2) The compiler (that works without any user-configuration changes) supports more of the C++0x features that I frequently use than other compilers. What are those mysterious C++0x features that you use? GCC's C++0x support is by far the most complete to date. See http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C%2B%2B0xCompilerSupport |
I've just recently read up on what GCC has been up to. Up until a few weeks ago, I wasn't aware that GCC has been released above 4.3. Those mysterious features were lambda expressions, actually.
| 3) The VS compiler didn't give me link errors when building boost::thread ! ! ! Neither does g++. |
I'll have to try it again then, but I couldn't get mingw (4.2) to link it correctly for the life of me. Apparently no one else had experienced what I did, because there was no help on boost's mailing lists, or the internet in general to help resolve the link errors.
In defense of the points made, please don't take any offense to this reply.
| This was my personal experience, it might not necessarily be the same in other people's cases. |
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.