MFC in .NET

[noble]

Is there MFC in the new .NET garbage?

[CornedBee]

No, .NET is there to replace all current MS libraries. MFC is obsolete with .NET (but I'll still use it, it's undoubtly much faster)

[parksie]

Originally posted by CornedBee
No, .NET is there to replace all current MS libraries. MFC is obsolete with .NET (but I'll still use it, it's undoubtly much faster)

Debatable, I expect.

The CLR has some interesting compilation features in it (cross-compilation between VB and C++, anyone?)

[CornedBee]

Nice feature, but I don't use VB and don't want to use it. I think of .NET as some evil MS thing, although I might have to learn it someday.
And MFC may not offer any cross-language (or even cross-compiler) capabilities, but it is faster. (The CLR is in some byte-code like thing, as are the .NET apps, or at least that's what I've heard)

[parksie]

Originally posted by CornedBee
Nice feature, but I don't use VB and don't want to use it. I think of .NET as some evil MS thing, although I might have to learn it someday.
And MFC may not offer any cross-language (or even cross-compiler) capabilities, but it is faster. (The CLR is in some byte-code like thing, as are the .NET apps, or at least that's what I've heard)

.NET starts as bytecode, but the only difference is that the programs take a little longer to start since they're fully compiled and optimised in one go, rather than Java which does it on the fly.

In .NET the language you use doesn't really matter, VB, C++, C#, you still end up in the same place.

[Pales]

MFC sucks! Borland VCL MUCH better!

[noble]

sigh