I came accross this while looking in the Developers page of VS2005. The IDE is partially written in C#, and its actually compiled on the 2005 Compiler, they say its a good way to test real world stability and performance.
Visual Studio 2005 written partially in C# :/
Miscellaneous Forums/General Discussion/Visual Studio 2005 written partially in C# :/ they say its a good way to test real world stability and performance.
Well they do have a point. Ofcourse it depends entirely on which parts of the IDE is written in C#. But overall, I'd say the complexity of Visual Studio is as good a benchmark as any.As long it it has features Eclipse has had for ages (like refactoring tools), it could be written in QBasic for all I care.
In my experience C# is around 15 - 20% slower than C/C++. With the IDE already being quite large/complex wouldnt it be better to use C/C++ instead of C#. But I guess its only partially so it shouldn't matter. I'm using Visual Studio 2005 Beta2 with Ogre at the moment and it seems a little faster than 2003. Plus libraries are much much smaller, in fact ~50% the size of ones made in VC. Dunno if this means I'm gonna have to include 100's of weird Dll's when distributing my apps :S
Not for long, the compiler technology will catch up. It seems to me you don't really understand the correct application of programming languages. It is senseless to use lower level techniques where there is no benefit, for example an IDE.
Do you also have a problem with how Blitzmax is also largely written in Blitzmax? :)
Do you also have a problem with how Blitzmax is also largely written in Blitzmax? :)
Its Microsoft, they have thousands of coders so I doubt the lower level stuff wouldnt matter much. There would be a benefit, speed/memory usage. Not that it would be THAT noticable. Of course development time could be argued and I'm not saying dont code it in C#. Im just wondering why Microsoft would use C# over C/C++. I dont have a problem with how the modules are written in BlitzMax, if it works then by all means do it ;)
Im jes curious, please don't kill me.
Im jes curious, please don't kill me.
Because:
-C# combined with the .Net base class libraries is a much more productive environment. The faster you can get software out the door, the better.
-.Net is the future for windows development, and c# is the flagship language for .Net. This isn't something that just happened. Its a huge company wide initiative, and ms put it in motion years ago.
Why is an app written in c# a dissapointment to you?
Can you provide more information on your benchmarks? I haven't done any c++ vs c# benchmarking personally, but I have read a lot of information about performance and comparisons. It's a deep subject, and there is lots of if's, and's, and but's. Generally though, c# should perform close to c++. There's a number of areas where it has advantages, and also where it has deficits. There's just alot of things to consider, so its not all black n white.
Also, with 2.0, theres has been performance/efficiency gains with new stuff like generics.. they avoid alot of the boxing issues present in 1.1 . The Performance of calling methods through a delegate apparantly has improved... From what I've read, there is still lots of room for improving the jit.
And of course, the biggest factor in performance is writing good code in the first place..
-C# combined with the .Net base class libraries is a much more productive environment. The faster you can get software out the door, the better.
-.Net is the future for windows development, and c# is the flagship language for .Net. This isn't something that just happened. Its a huge company wide initiative, and ms put it in motion years ago.
Why is an app written in c# a dissapointment to you?
Can you provide more information on your benchmarks? I haven't done any c++ vs c# benchmarking personally, but I have read a lot of information about performance and comparisons. It's a deep subject, and there is lots of if's, and's, and but's. Generally though, c# should perform close to c++. There's a number of areas where it has advantages, and also where it has deficits. There's just alot of things to consider, so its not all black n white.
Also, with 2.0, theres has been performance/efficiency gains with new stuff like generics.. they avoid alot of the boxing issues present in 1.1 . The Performance of calling methods through a delegate apparantly has improved... From what I've read, there is still lots of room for improving the jit.
And of course, the biggest factor in performance is writing good code in the first place..
Delphi is written in Delphi too.
With the IDE already being quite large/complex wouldnt it be better to use C/C++ instead of C#
As I understand it, C# with .NET is supposed to be a fully capable development platform. It wouldn't say much for the language if the IDE was entirely written in something else.
The VC2005 C# ide is a lot better than The VC2005 C++ IDE, or at least it was as of beta 2.
Alot of the performance difference stuff was read off the Microsoft website. Microsoft is using a Combination of C# and whatever other language its been written in, thats what I'm wondering, why would they combine two different languages to make one piece of software? Had they gone fully Managed C# then you could probably get the program running on Linux or whatever. But since its a combination that rules out any instant Linux usuge -- at least without some modification or emulation.
Ant: What do you mean by that, Did Microsoft write two versions of the DevEnv? I'm using Beta2 at the moment and I must admit the IDE is slower than VC2003. But its early days and the big fat BETA clearly means "this ain't the final product ass face".
Agreed, and despite what some people say, Microsoft writes decent code.
Ant: What do you mean by that, Did Microsoft write two versions of the DevEnv? I'm using Beta2 at the moment and I must admit the IDE is slower than VC2003. But its early days and the big fat BETA clearly means "this ain't the final product ass face".
And of course, the biggest factor in performance is writing good code in the first place..
Agreed, and despite what some people say, Microsoft writes decent code.
why would they combine two different languages to make one piece of software?
Because they don't want to rewrite everything in one go. If it isn't broken, don't fix it. Agreed, and despite what some people say, Microsoft writes decent code.
That certainly depends on how you measure "decent code". I thought they just bought other peoples decent code and slapped "Microsoft" in front of the name on it?!?
hehe
hehe
Thats what they did when they were a smaller company (Things like Direct3D come to mind) but I think theyre more independent now, but still not fully.
Flame: How do you measure decent code? I would say decent code is something that does its job without to many problems. If it gets the job done without to many problems it deserves the title Decent. Decent being around 6/10.
Flame: How do you measure decent code? I would say decent code is something that does its job without to many problems. If it gets the job done without to many problems it deserves the title Decent. Decent being around 6/10.
My XP hasn't crashed since i bought it.