Monday, October 20, 2014

Maybe this is why I am such a sloppy programmer....

C++ and MFC



“In 1989 C++ 2.0 was released followed by the updated second edition of The C++ Programming Language in 1991.[9] New features in 2.0 included multiple inheritance, abstract classes, static member functions, const member functions, and protected members. In 1990, The Annotated C++ Reference Manual was published. This work became the basis for the future standard. Late feature additions included templatesexceptionsnamespaces, new casts, and a boolean type.
In 2011, C++11 was released which added more features and enlarged the standard library further (compared to it in 1998), providing more facilities for C++ programmers to use, with more additions planned for 2014 and 2017.”

I remember taking a class on C++ using Bjarne Stroustrup’s book in 1992 or 1993. Since C++ was so new to industry, my professor didn't even really understand the class implementation of the language making the class quite nightmarish. This was also the last programming class I took in college. After graduating college, I didn't do any programming until coming to Corning in 1999, and that was just VBA.


'Windows Forms seemed to me what MFC should have been'
All the early books used C, but then Petzold shifted to writing about C# and .NET. Was he comfortable with such a high level of abstraction?
“I started out with machine code and assembly language. I took to C very well. I kind of skipped over C++ and MFC. C++ always looked like an extraordinarily ugly language to me, and MFC was not a very well-designed object-oriented wrapper around the API. I thought there should be something better. My first experience of .NET was with C# and Windows Forms, and was extremely favourable. [sic] I liked C# sharp as a programming language, I liked .NET as a sturdy, extensive, runtime library, and Windows Forms seemed to me what MFC should have been.”

This is interesting since LabVIEW (sorry, yes, everything right now relates back to LV, I should diversify) seems to rely so heavily on, but is quite hamstrung by it.

No comments:

Post a Comment