|
|
Isn't that a framework, not a language?
|
|
|
|
|
It's a C++ framework so it kind of implies the language.
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
No it doesn't. I'm sure it can be used with other languages.
|
|
|
|
|
It is a C++ framework and it definitely can not be used with other languages.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: I'm sure it can be used with other languages. I can't say it with certainty, but I would not bet anything on that afirmation
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a C++ API making heavy use of compiler macros. While not impossible, its design would make any API wrappers massive fugly affairs (and MFC is fugly enough on its own).
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
You don't want to use MFC with C++, never mind any other languages...
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
|
|
|
|
|
That's been my suspicion since the 90s. I Don't recall ever hearing anything good about it.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure there's some sadist somewhere who has wrapped with C exports and built a DLL.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps you are thinking of MVC?
|
|
|
|
|
I still use it and one other guy here does too. We must be about the only three people who do.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Well, in my former workplace we didn't beause they were too advanced, not joking.
Win32 API and VB6 were our main GUI tools.
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, those certainly are advanced.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Four - me too. We have an active product that got its start using VC6.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Wheeler wrote: We have an active product that got its start using VC6
Us too - although it's gone through several other Visual Studio versions since then (2003, 2008, 2010 and now 2013, with a probable upgrade to 2017 or maybe 2019 in the next year).
And we've moved from MFC to Qt for new components, although we still have two from around 2005 that a) still use MFC, and b) still work fine (so there's no reason for updating them).
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
|
|
|
|
|
We're still using VS2008 as our primary development tool, even though we purchased licenses for VS2015. Our workload is such that VS2019 will be obsolete before we have time to update. It's not even that we can't update the code. The problem is that there isn't sufficient time and people to do the regression test necessary.
And I know full well all of the smells that last statement gives rise to.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I feel your pain - I'm just glad that as our product is itself a tool for testing embedded system software, it's particularly easy for us to have automated whole-system regression tests. We just run existing tests that our (internal to our company) customers have used & verify that all the output artifacts remain the same (except where we expect the changes, of course).
If it makes you feel any better, we're particularly bad with unit tests - we have a few, but probably less than 1% coverage. And when we started, we had no SCM, and then when we did get SCM, it was SourceSafe...
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
|
|
|
|
|
Stuart Dootson wrote: when we did get SCM, it was SourceSafe. We're still using SourceSafe. Three or four years ago we thought about converting to git, and even had a pilot project moved to it. Between layoffs and shuffled responsibilities, it didn't happen .
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I use it often. I find dynamic data exchange a bit verbose though these days.
|
|
|
|
|
We support a few legacy apps that use MFC. The sooner we can find an excuse to port them to Qt, the better...
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
|
|
|
|
|
I have been looking at alternatives too. WxWidgets and Qt seem to be the main contenders right now.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
We've only got good things to say about Qt really - aside maybe from the size of the Qt distribution being rather large.
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I just downloaded the 2.4GB file yesterday. Yikes.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Whitespace[^], of course.
It's a very clean and concise language and it's so intuitive that I've never actually seen a bug in it!
In the front-end I'm going for JSF*ck[^], which is actually legit better than JavaScript.
I've been replacing Whitespace with Brainf*ck[^] so I can utilize the full F*ck stack.
If you're doing any other languages you should seriously reconsider a career change because apparently you're unfit to code without training wheels.
That said, my clients do sometimes demand that I use C#, JavaScript and SQL, so I do make exceptions for those amateurs
|
|
|
|