6 ms·

I tried remember reading an article on HN a couple of years ago about how MSVC got initial C++ support and added more and more features over time, despite havin

I tried remember reading an article on HN a couple of years ago about how MSVC got initial C++ support and added more and more features over time, despite having not being designed with C++ in mind originally. The result was a combination of clever hacks after clever hacks, with the consequence being the reputation MSVC got over time (I'm not saying this is one the consequence shown in the OP) Anyway, does anybody still have this article somewhere? I couldn't find it anymore :(

jchw 8y ago
MSVC has had C++ support for a long time, to be fair. GCC was probably just as bad at first, it just improved more steadily over time. Today, GCC and Clang both seem like very robust C++ compilers, and it doesn't feel like MSVC is terribly far behind (it does feels like it is behind, in my perception, just not far.)
- pjmlp 8y ago
  Visual C++ has the best C++ among commercial C++ compilers. http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support And the table lacks most embedded compilers.
  - fyi1183 8y ago
    That feels like one of these misleading marketing statements. The real competition are GCC and clang. But yes, embedded compilers are usually a nightmare.
    - pjmlp 8y ago
      They are the competition when one only cares about *BSD, GNU/Linux, Windows systems.
      - jchw 8y ago
        Well, and Android and iOS and many microcontrollers (well, often a shitty GCC fork in that case but still) and way more platforms (OpenBSD, Minix, HP-UX, Solaris, VxWorks, bare metal) and architectures (Alpha, ARM, AVR, x86, m68k, microblaze, MIPS, PDP-11, Risc-V, SPARC, VMS) than that, not including third party ports in SDKs. Yeah, I get that with embedded, it's a crapshoot. However it's probably not ridiculous to say that GCC ports to microcontrollers is not terribly uncommon, either. GCC and Clang certainly are a lot more useful than for just that tiny range you listed. The reality is they probably cover more platforms than any other individual compiler.
        pjmlp 8y ago
        When I was involved in mainframe or commercial UNIX projects we always used the OS vendor SDK, hence why I left them out of my list.
scarface74 8y ago
I'm a two decade Windows developer so this isn't a "M$ Sucks" comment, but Windows itself is a series of hack on top of hack because Microsoft refuses to break backwards compatibility. As much as MS had the reputation of "Windows isn't done until Lotus won't run" back in the day. If you follow some of the MSDN blogs, you'll find the extraordinary hacks that MS has done over the years to keep the most obscure programs running. People complain about how Apple will drop support for backwards compatibility but this a consequence of the MS culture of doing just the opposite.
- justonepost 8y ago
  There’s a very good business in maintaining backwards compatibility. Any large enterprise is not going to buy from a company that they can’t rely on having a roadmap that will fix security issues but won’t break their deployed software.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    Unfortunately the market for "companies that need to deploy a fleet of Windows computers to run a bespoke app" is shrinking compared to the entire market. I'm thinking UWP is a them attempting to start over.
    - Narishma 8y ago
      Isn't UWP still built on top of all those hacks upon hacks the previous commenter mentioned?
      - slededit 8y ago
        Yes, but it does a reasonable job of hiding it.
      - scarface74 8y ago
        But it should allow easier compatibility with lighter weight versions of Windows.
  - 8y ago
cesarb 8y ago
Perhaps it was one of these two? https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2017/09/11/two-phase-name-lookup-support-comes-to-msvc/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2017/09/11/two-phase... https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2015/09/25/rejuvenating-the-microsoft-cc-compiler/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2015/09/25/rejuvenat...
- multani 8y ago
  That might be the one from 2015 that I was looking for! Thanks!
stinos 8y ago
the reputation MSVC got over time In most places I worked for it actually seemed to have the reputation of a fairly good compiler toolset, unfortunately with just a bit of non-standardness sprinkled on top of it, a bug here and there, and perhaps not the fastest out there. (Which describes pretty much every other compiler out there as well: it's not like there's a perfect one with no quirks whatsoever). But it does the job, the optimization is ok as well, and it usually comes integrated in VS which is top of the line compared to other IDEs.

jchw 8y ago

MSVC has had C++ support for a long time, to be fair. GCC was probably just as bad at first, it just improved more steadily over time. Today, GCC and Clang both seem like very robust C++ compilers, and it doesn't feel like MSVC is terribly far behind (it does feels like it is behind, in my perception, just not far.)

pjmlp 8y ago
Visual C++ has the best C++ among commercial C++ compilers. http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support And the table lacks most embedded compilers.
- fyi1183 8y ago
  That feels like one of these misleading marketing statements. The real competition are GCC and clang. But yes, embedded compilers are usually a nightmare.
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    They are the competition when one only cares about *BSD, GNU/Linux, Windows systems.
    - jchw 8y ago
      Well, and Android and iOS and many microcontrollers (well, often a shitty GCC fork in that case but still) and way more platforms (OpenBSD, Minix, HP-UX, Solaris, VxWorks, bare metal) and architectures (Alpha, ARM, AVR, x86, m68k, microblaze, MIPS, PDP-11, Risc-V, SPARC, VMS) than that, not including third party ports in SDKs. Yeah, I get that with embedded, it's a crapshoot. However it's probably not ridiculous to say that GCC ports to microcontrollers is not terribly uncommon, either. GCC and Clang certainly are a lot more useful than for just that tiny range you listed. The reality is they probably cover more platforms than any other individual compiler.
      - pjmlp 8y ago
        When I was involved in mainframe or commercial UNIX projects we always used the OS vendor SDK, hence why I left them out of my list.

scarface74 8y ago

I'm a two decade Windows developer so this isn't a "M$ Sucks" comment, but Windows itself is a series of hack on top of hack because Microsoft refuses to break backwards compatibility. As much as MS had the reputation of "Windows isn't done until Lotus won't run" back in the day. If you follow some of the MSDN blogs, you'll find the extraordinary hacks that MS has done over the years to keep the most obscure programs running. People complain about how Apple will drop support for backwards compatibility but this a consequence of the MS culture of doing just the opposite.

justonepost 8y ago
There’s a very good business in maintaining backwards compatibility. Any large enterprise is not going to buy from a company that they can’t rely on having a roadmap that will fix security issues but won’t break their deployed software.
- scarface74 8y ago
  Unfortunately the market for "companies that need to deploy a fleet of Windows computers to run a bespoke app" is shrinking compared to the entire market. I'm thinking UWP is a them attempting to start over.
  - Narishma 8y ago
    Isn't UWP still built on top of all those hacks upon hacks the previous commenter mentioned?
    - slededit 8y ago
      Yes, but it does a reasonable job of hiding it.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      But it should allow easier compatibility with lighter weight versions of Windows.
- 8y ago

cesarb 8y ago

Perhaps it was one of these two? https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2017/09/11/two-phase-name-lookup-support-comes-to-msvc/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2017/09/11/two-phase... https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2015/09/25/rejuvenating-the-microsoft-cc-compiler/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2015/09/25/rejuvenat...

multani 8y ago
That might be the one from 2015 that I was looking for! Thanks!

stinos 8y ago

the reputation MSVC got over time In most places I worked for it actually seemed to have the reputation of a fairly good compiler toolset, unfortunately with just a bit of non-standardness sprinkled on top of it, a bug here and there, and perhaps not the fastest out there. (Which describes pretty much every other compiler out there as well: it's not like there's a perfect one with no quirks whatsoever). But it does the job, the optimization is ok as well, and it usually comes integrated in VS which is top of the line compared to other IDEs.