5 ms·

Wait, what's wrong with using Visual Studio Community? https://www.visualstudio.com/vs/community/ https://www.visualstudio.com/vs/community/

microcolonel 9y ago
The problem is that the VS Community license doesn't work for people who are building proprietary or in-house software at a company. Even if the code is open source, they are building it into a proprietary product. For that proprietary product, they are behind on toolchains because $$$, so for the time being we need workarounds. For what it's worth, a lot of the glaring issues will soon be alleviated, I'm not that enthusiastic about C++14, C++17, etc. features anyway. C++11 for me is really about catching up with C99.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Other professionals buy their tools. I don't see any reason for a company to not pay for software licenses.
  - microcolonel 9y ago
    They did buy their tools, they just don't want to buy their tools again, and again, and again, especially if they don't see the value (at the level of the organization) to bother with a new version VS when the one they have is largely adequate and accommodated.
    - pjmlp 9y ago
      Same applies to any other commercial compiler outside GNU/Linux and BSD worlds. They don't offer upgrades for free. Even on macOS eventually getting a new version implies an hardware upgrade to get hold of the newest version, thus indirectly paying for the compiler.
      - microcolonel 9y ago
        I don't particularly care, as long as there is no incentive for a company to be building software with pre-C++11 compilers. I don't have any problem paying for tools if it's covered or part of the budget. The problem is that the unique combination of ubiquity, expensive upgrades, and relative lack of substantial innovation (which would offer an additional incentive for upgrades) means that MSVC shops can be simultaneously willing to buy licenses one year, and unwilling to buy upgrades another. I don't like your inquisitive tone and persistent uncharitable reading of my comments, and I will not engage any further without an outright apology. Good day.
- indubitable 9y ago
  Can you elaborate here? The VS Community license is fine for small companies, and I don't think the licensing fee is a major issue for larger companies. 'Small companies' being defined as those with less than $1 million annual revenue and < 6 employees using the software concurrently.
  - microcolonel 9y ago
    If you already bought VS 2010 licenses for n seats, you don't want to have to buy VS 2015/2017 licenses for n seats if there is not some additional benefit that is perceived to be worth $500-1200 dollars per seat. Yes, maybe many, perhaps most companies don't sweat it, but the ones that do sweat it have the problem, you dig? In my ideal world, nobody would bother with using the MSVC compilers (or they would finally make upgrades free for the compiler at least), and we'd all be running the latest stable or LTS versions, and have similar standards for compiler features and performance. Unfortunately, there is a market incentive for some companies to use MSVC, and there is a market incentive for them to not upgrade that MSVC license until they absolutely must.

microcolonel 9y ago

The problem is that the VS Community license doesn't work for people who are building proprietary or in-house software at a company. Even if the code is open source, they are building it into a proprietary product. For that proprietary product, they are behind on toolchains because $$$, so for the time being we need workarounds. For what it's worth, a lot of the glaring issues will soon be alleviated, I'm not that enthusiastic about C++14, C++17, etc. features anyway. C++11 for me is really about catching up with C99.

pjmlp 9y ago
Other professionals buy their tools. I don't see any reason for a company to not pay for software licenses.
- microcolonel 9y ago
  They did buy their tools, they just don't want to buy their tools again, and again, and again, especially if they don't see the value (at the level of the organization) to bother with a new version VS when the one they have is largely adequate and accommodated.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    Same applies to any other commercial compiler outside GNU/Linux and BSD worlds. They don't offer upgrades for free. Even on macOS eventually getting a new version implies an hardware upgrade to get hold of the newest version, thus indirectly paying for the compiler.
    - microcolonel 9y ago
      I don't particularly care, as long as there is no incentive for a company to be building software with pre-C++11 compilers. I don't have any problem paying for tools if it's covered or part of the budget. The problem is that the unique combination of ubiquity, expensive upgrades, and relative lack of substantial innovation (which would offer an additional incentive for upgrades) means that MSVC shops can be simultaneously willing to buy licenses one year, and unwilling to buy upgrades another. I don't like your inquisitive tone and persistent uncharitable reading of my comments, and I will not engage any further without an outright apology. Good day.
indubitable 9y ago
Can you elaborate here? The VS Community license is fine for small companies, and I don't think the licensing fee is a major issue for larger companies. 'Small companies' being defined as those with less than $1 million annual revenue and < 6 employees using the software concurrently.
- microcolonel 9y ago
  If you already bought VS 2010 licenses for n seats, you don't want to have to buy VS 2015/2017 licenses for n seats if there is not some additional benefit that is perceived to be worth $500-1200 dollars per seat. Yes, maybe many, perhaps most companies don't sweat it, but the ones that do sweat it have the problem, you dig? In my ideal world, nobody would bother with using the MSVC compilers (or they would finally make upgrades free for the compiler at least), and we'd all be running the latest stable or LTS versions, and have similar standards for compiler features and performance. Unfortunately, there is a market incentive for some companies to use MSVC, and there is a market incentive for them to not upgrade that MSVC license until they absolutely must.