Board index » cppbuilder » Re: C++\CLI compiler

Re: C++\CLI compiler


2007-09-12 10:15:23 PM
cppbuilder16
Hendrik Schober wrote:
Quote
(And, yes, of course, the
size of the app has a considerable influence on its
speed.)
But none on the speed of the GUI, the MFC or the VCL. And generally,
not even on the overall speed, unless it is sooo big that parts must be
swapped in and out all the time. Or if it opens so many windows and
controls at the same time that it brings Windows to its knees. But even
then, that has no influence on the speed difference between VCL and
MFC. Actually, since the VCL contains quite a few non-windowed
components (unlike the MFC, AFAIK), it should do better, in such
situations.
Quote
It's your classical way of "arguing": Someone says
something that's negative for CG/Delphi/VCL/BCB,
and you promptly come along and bluntly state you
have never seen it
And often enough, if I have experienced the same problem, I will say so
as well (bluntly, if you like). You apparently seem to ignore those
occasions.
Your classical way of arguing seems to be to tell me that I am a
hobbyist, and what does a dentist know about programming, or the
business anyway?
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]
"It's the liberal bias. The press is liberally biased to the
right." -- Ken de Camargo
 
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Quote
ok Rudy, I'm no longer going to play these little word games with you
any longer.

IOW I got nothing
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Quote
One would expect it to be so, as it provides a higher level of abstraction
than MFC, and runs on top of the same set of platform APIs. MFC is a
thinner layer (which is both an advantage and a curse) and so should be
expected to be add less execution overhead.

I'm not sure i'd say thinner. Flatter maybe. Go look at the code for
the base MFC window class. It's huge. WTL improves upon this by
letting you mixin classes instead of having everything and the kitchen
sink in the base window class.
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Frank J wrote:
Quote
I would assume it's the same test that most of you are using to
determine .NET is slower than the VCL.
OK, thank you. I think I get it now.
.a
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote:
Quote
LOL!
:)
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Frode Nilsen wrote:
Quote

Isn't it a long time since VCL was only a UI framework ?

TThread, TDataset, AnsiString etc.

As MFC is, I'd imagine only similar parts would be compared.
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Dear me, Dear me;
you know prcisely what everyone's thinking. Brillant...
You might do well to EOD as suggested.
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

"Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote

Your classical way of arguing seems to be to tell me that I am a
hobbyist, and what does a dentist know about programming, or the
business anyway?
--
Since Shobi may have the good sence not to respond, and I lack such, I'll
ask where the $#!+ you got that impression except within your own self?
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Hendrik Schober wrote:
Quote
Andre Kaufmann < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
[...]
Someone here has posted the link to Soma's blog entry.
Have you read the repsonses?
Just have.
Perhaps most of them haven't touched any other framework than MFC.
Regarding the future of MFC: I don't know how a compatible version of
MFC could be developed, which is as comfortable / straightforward than
the other frameworks.
But since the next version (after the upcoming one) should cite: " knock
my socks off " I at least would expect it to be so. Anything other would
be a big disappointment. We'll see.
Quote
[...]
Schobi
Andre
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Andre Kaufmann < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
Hendrik Schober wrote:
>Andre Kaufmann < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
>[...]
>Someone here has posted the link to Soma's blog entry.
>Have you read the repsonses?

Just have.
Perhaps most of them haven't touched any other framework than MFC.
I am /sure/ most haven't.
Quote
Regarding the future of MFC: I don't know how a compatible version of
MFC could be developed, which is as comfortable / straightforward than
the other frameworks.
Just like the way you create a compatible version of
C++ that's easy to parse? :)
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm HSchober at gmx dot de
"A patched buffer overflow doesn't mean that there's one less way attackers
can get into your system; it means that your design process was so lousy
that it permitted buffer overflows, and there are probably thousands more
lurking in your code."
Bruce Schneier
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Alex Bakaev [TeamB] < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
Frode Nilsen wrote:

>
>Isn't it a long time since VCL was only a UI framework ?
[...]

As MFC is [...]
But is it? I haven't worked with it, haven't even looked
at it -- but from help snippets I stumbled upon in the
MSDN, it seemed to me it's more than this. ICBW, though.
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm HSchober at gmx dot de
"A patched buffer overflow doesn't mean that there's one less way attackers
can get into your system; it means that your design process was so lousy
that it permitted buffer overflows, and there are probably thousands more
lurking in your code."
Bruce Schneier
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Hendrik Schober wrote:
Quote
But is it? I haven't worked with it, haven't even looked
I would think so.
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

"Frode Nilsen" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote

Isn't it a long time since VCL was only a UI framework ?

TThread, TDataset, AnsiString etc.

When was MFC ever only a UI framework?
CWinThread, CDatabase, CString, etc.
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Hendrik Schober wrote:
Quote
Andre Kaufmann < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
[...]
>Regarding the future of MFC: I don't know how a compatible version of
>MFC could be developed, which is as comfortable / straightforward than
>the other frameworks.

Just like the way you create a compatible version of
C++ that's easy to parse? :)
:-). I would appreciate a compatible, easy to parse and compatible
version of C++. IMHO the C++ committee has a good chance of stripping
some relics and reduce complexity somewhat in C++ for C++ modules.
Quote
Schobi
Andre
 

Re:Re: C++\CLI compiler

Andre Kaufmann < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
Hendrik Schober wrote:
>Andre Kaufmann < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
>[...]
>>Regarding the future of MFC: I don't know how a compatible version of
>>MFC could be developed, which is as comfortable / straightforward than
>>the other frameworks.
>
>Just like the way you create a compatible version of
>C++ that's easy to parse? :)

:-). I would appreciate a compatible, easy to parse and compatible
version of C++. IMHO the C++ committee has a good chance of stripping
some relics and reduce complexity somewhat in C++ for C++ modules.
Any examples?
Quote
Andre
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm HSchober at gmx dot de
"A patched buffer overflow doesn't mean that there's one less way attackers
can get into your system; it means that your design process was so lousy
that it permitted buffer overflows, and there are probably thousands more
lurking in your code."
Bruce Schneier