What's wrong with C++?

[xavier]

I always found the most endearing feature to be that it stores its project files in binary form...always fun in a source-controlled environment...

Binary project files? Ouch.

Yup. So you got to lock them in Perforce, which meant that no one else could add/delete files to the project while you had it open, and in many cases it ended up being easier to walk over to the person who had it locked, give them the files you needed added, and let them do the add/delete in the project. Wonderful user-friendliness...not to mention the productivity boost it provides. Radix (CW replacement on the Wii dev environment) was marginally better, but still well short of the ease of use of a VS. It's a wonder anyone ever pulled off a Wii title on time...

[BTolputt]

Xavier, I have great respect for you and your work but in this particular case - you are wrong. ISO accepts patent encumbered standards as long as, and I said this, they are made available under "reasonable and non-discriminatory terms".

Exact details can be found with a quick Google search, but I found a reasonable source I thought you'd find hard to argue as being "biased" on the issue http://www.niso.org/publications/white_ ... Caplan.pdf

This is not a slight against you, but it was either saying this and informing everyone or letting incorrect information stand unchallenged. Sorry.

[xavier]

Xavier, I have great respect for you and your work but in this particular case - you are wrong. ISO accepts patent encumbered standards as long as, and I said this, they are made available under "reasonable and non-discriminatory terms".

Which, as your link points out, are worth about the same as the four words that make up RAND. That was my point, obtuse though it may have been.

Even Microsoft finally realized the absurdity of patenting a computer language:

http://port25.technet.com/archive/2009/ ... dards.aspx

That in essence is Microsoft saying "we are basically releasing the patent now".

[BTolputt]

Which, as your link points out, are worth about the same as the four words that make up RAND. That was my point, obtuse though it may have been.

My apologies, I read it as you stating that ISO standard are by definition open and hence could not have patents in them. If I understand you correctly, you were actually showing that ISO standards are just as "proprietary" as having no standards at all (as you still need to pay people to implement them). My mistake. ISO's recent actions in the computer software space have left them less credible than when I decided to enter the engineering industry. Sad really...

Even Microsoft finally realized the absurdity of patenting a computer language

And yet they keep the patent, make a "promise" (as opposed to irrevocable license) covering their actions only (i.e. patent could be sold and then enforced by external parties), and have a patent on the "IS NOT operator" for crying out loud. Microsoft and software patents are not a comfortable situation for alot of people.

[bvanevery]

And yet they keep the patent, make a "promise" (as opposed to irrevocable license) covering their actions only (i.e. patent could be sold and then enforced by external parties), and have a patent on the "IS NOT operator" for crying out loud. Microsoft and software patents are not a comfortable situation for alot of people.

Look whatever you're worried about with regards to C# and patents, the reality is, the patent clock is ticking. It's been 8 years since it came out and the sky hasn't fallen. Another 12 years and whatever people thought the initial problem was, is done and over with. Yes you can track whether MS has issued yet more patents in the interim that have a time window farther into the future. At what point do you stop angsting that big bad old Microsoft is going to stomp on you next year, and just get some software written? MS isn't going anywhere, the idea that they'd sell their C# patent interests to an unscrupulous 3rd party is completely silly.

[jacmoe]

lol it would appear not jacmoe, did u install the add-in for gtk#? (tools->add-in manager->install add-ins) i wouldn't install gtk# 2.12 it didn't work the best for me, 2.10 would be best.

I'll do that!

Wow, this topic has exploded?!

[BTolputt]

It's been 8 years since it came out and the sky hasn't fallen. Another 12 years and whatever people thought the initial problem was, is done and over with.

You are seriously going to use that line? In twelve years, my son is going to have FINISHED university... and he's still in primary school (grade school for you North Americans ). And for the record, the issue isn't for me - it is a problem for the large clients I contract to. It is their money on the line, I just wrote the software - they are the ones running/relying on it.

At what point do you stop angsting that big bad old Microsoft is going to stomp on you next year, and just get some software written?

I don't angst - I work with alternatives I don't need to worry about It's not like there is a lack of them or that not working in a Microsoft-encumbered language puts me out of work! Hell, with the number of graduates jumping on the "latest & greatest language" bandwagon, it makes it easier for a guy with my skills to get work. When I left university, Java was "The Enterprise Platform" and, at the moment, C# & it's friends are "The Enterprise Platform". Funnily enough, development requiring C/C++ skills is still around and quite easy to get

MS isn't going anywhere, the idea that they'd sell their C# patent interests to an unscrupulous 3rd party is completely silly.

I'm not anti-Microsoft. I've written an enterprise system in C# before, put together large web applications using IIS & server0side ActiveX components, and quite honestly think that MSVC is the best C/C++ IDE I have ever worked with (and still do for that matter). With that said, you are aware that Microsoft is not only a monopoly convicted of anti-competitive practices but has been convicted of similar offences in recent MONTHS (not years) right?

Microsoft tried stealing technology from a small outfit that put together some document search stuff. They were shown the tech by the company in question and simply stole the idea with the intention of driving the company out of business (documented in emails exposed in the court case). Ironically enough, they might have gotten away with it if the small cpompany hadn't taken out some "software patents" on the technology in question!

I'm not saying they are better or worse than any other corporation their size, but to ignore that they will use any tactics at their disposal to remain on top is to ignore their history (years past and recent).

[jacmoe]

lol it would appear not jacmoe, did u install the add-in for gtk#? (tools->add-in manager->install add-ins) i wouldn't install gtk# 2.12 it didn't work the best for me, 2.10 would be best.

I'll do that!

And I did!
And it worked!

Thanks so much, Conallmmcg!
That was too obvious - I guess...
Now I can toy around with Mono, GTK# and C# on my Linux box.

[conallmmcg]

lol it would appear not jacmoe, did u install the add-in for gtk#? (tools->add-in manager->install add-ins) i wouldn't install gtk# 2.12 it didn't work the best for me, 2.10 would be best.

I'll do that!

And I did!
And it worked!

Thanks so much, Conallmmcg!
That was too obvious - I guess...
Now I can toy around with Mono, GTK# and C# on my Linux box.

I'm glad it was confusing for me at first too, but its a nice little IDE to work with and i really like C#, if only there was a cross platform .net version of ogre being maintained . yeah this topic has gotten rather big lol

[jacmoe]

What threw me was that MonoDevelop features project wizards using GTK#, even when it's not installed.
That's extremely bad form, IMO.
But it was an easy fix, once I was told what I needed to do.

[bvanevery]

It's been 8 years since it came out and the sky hasn't fallen. Another 12 years and whatever people thought the initial problem was, is done and over with.[...]
MS isn't going anywhere, the idea that they'd sell their C# patent interests to an unscrupulous 3rd party is completely silly.

I'm not saying they are better or worse than any other corporation their size, but to ignore that they will use any tactics at their disposal to remain on top is to ignore their history (years past and recent).

The point is, stomping all over, say, Mono, is not going to be some other company's decision. It's going to be Microsoft's decision. For 8 years they haven't decided to do that. What's gonna change? What's the criteria you're expecting, for why MS will change gears?

[BTolputt]

Look, I'm not going to get into an anti/pro Microsoft debate. The people that support the company are not likely to change their view and the same goes for those against the company. I pretty much do not care one way or the other.

What I stated are facts, what you are arguing is supposition. I can never prove false something that "might happen". So I argue what has.

• Microsoft has patents on the language - this is something that is public record.
• Microsoft has used patents against corporations when they've moved away from Windows - TomTom & the FAT Patent
• Microsoft is a monopoly (as judged by the courts) and has been convicted of anti-competitive practices in the USA & Europe
• Microsoft's control over the language & who may use it is something that has convinced clients of mine to pursue different platform solutions than C# & it's brethren.

Anything above and beyond that is going to get into the realms of you claiming Microsoft would never repeat their anti-competitive practices and me stating why should we risk it? It'll never be resolved and is best left as a mailing list flamewar

[bvanevery]

Anything above and beyond that is going to get into the realms of you claiming Microsoft would never repeat their anti-competitive practices and me stating why should we risk it? It'll never be resolved and is best left as a mailing list flamewar

What you're not acknowledging, is the reality of MS's practice for the past 8 years. If they're acting on C# patents, their pace is positively glacial. This is squarely at odds with every other anti-competitive practice they've engaged in. Usually if they want someone dead, they do it pretty quickly, within the space of a few years.

[BTolputt]

Seriously mate, I'm not going to debate it on this forum. I strongly disagree with you, and I haven't ignored what you're saying I have. If you are really interested in why, reread my last post. The example you are looking for is in there. That said, I am not going continue this debate. We will not agree on this and given we are debating possible future actions, neither of us can win the debate until Microsoft either is finished as a company or the patents expire.

I'm trying to do the nice thing of "agreeing to disagree", some reciprocation would be nice. Especially on a forum dedicated to something other than the eternal Microsoft vs The World debates.

[Xypher]

Wow, I was actually mildly offended by the FQA...

[volca]

Dunno, what do you find so cool about Java? It is simple to learn, true, but I find it a bit too restricting to use and not very internally consistent.

[jacmoe]

Guys, you're talking to a deactivated spammer.

[Xypher]

I believe C++ is to software just as hardware electronics is to computing, its confusing as hell, doesn't make a ton of sense half the time, and you're always running into stacks of bugs which drive you insane. I love it!

[jacmoe]

I found a good blog with the same title:
http://blog.codeimproved.net/2010/07/wh ... ng-with-c/

I agree with everything.

And this:
http://blog.codeimproved.net/2010/06/c- ... g-in-2010/

Meaning that C++ is *not* on the way out.

To the contrary.

Gotta love it..

[BTolputt]

Thanks for those links, jacmoe, it is nice to see some of the experienced developers kicking back at the "C++ is dead" meme. There is a reason that a majority of operating systems, database servers, and even games are written in C/C++... and it's got nothing to do with the latest fad