MVP Award...
in [MFC]
|
Prev: CMenu class and menu object
Next: need some class help
From: Hector Santos on 27 Feb 2010 18:18 David Lowndes wrote: >> Right, but how do you then know if the performance problem is with the >> tools or the VM? > > Only by contrasting performance with a similar VM on the same host. I > know it's not a reliable method, but it's the way I choose to do > things these days, and it's definitely much slower than VS2005. > >> I agree with Giovanni - on a Windows 7 with plenty of RAM, VC2010 RC >> is not bad at all. > > It's not bad on my i7 machine in a VM, but in a VM on a lesser capable > host, I find it's quite noticeably slower. It may be the straw that > breaks the camel's back on that machine, I've tried increasing the RAM > allocation but that didn't seem to have much benefit. > > Dave Ok, so whats the "New Normal" here. Whats going to be the minimal hardware requirements for VS2010 for BAO (Bearable Acceptable Operations)? w/o VM? Wouldn't it be nice if MS will package a "VS2010 Lite"? - Resource Editor, MFC class wizard - Compiler - Linker - Debugger We peons depends on MVP people to represent the USERS of these forum. :) -- HLS
From: Giovanni Dicanio on 28 Feb 2010 05:35 "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio news:OIAywMAuKHA.6124(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Whats going to be the minimal hardware requirements for VS2010 for BAO > (Bearable Acceptable Operations)? w/o VM? Without VM I can tell you that it seems to run with decent performance on a Win7 x64 with Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.3 GHz and 3 GB of RAM. Giovanni
From: Giovanni Dicanio on 28 Feb 2010 05:41 "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio news:OIAywMAuKHA.6124(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Wouldn't it be nice if MS will package a "VS2010 Lite"? > > - Resource Editor, MFC class wizard > - Compiler > - Linker > - Debugger What you are asking here seems to me a C++-only focused IDE, in other words, the philosophy: we don't use .NET so we don't want to pay for it. Just like VC6 was: just pure C++ (VB6 was a *different* IDE). Instead, since VS.NET 2003 the trend seems to be: every language (from C++ to C# to VB.NET to F#, to ASP.NET, etc.) share the same IDE. I may be wrong, but I believe that Microsoft is not going back to the "C++-only" IDE. However, when you install VS2010, you can choose what components to install and what not. For example, I excluded ASP.NET/web development from the VS2010 RC installation. What about installing C++ only? Giovanni
From: Hector Santos on 28 Feb 2010 07:44 Cost is not the issue. But knowing what the new cost requirements (w/o WM) is. I just wish to have a fast productive environment that is not inundated with these on-going side issues. You might as well make the IDE part of the OS so it boots up with the rest of the system and ready to go - a MS Compiler OS so to speak. :) I dont' want be delayed in loading the IDE, typing or cut/pasting and moving from file to file, etc, or that it now takes 3-5 longer to compile code in an agile environment. So its more of a "Divide and Conquer" approach to solving this integrated issue. It seems to continue to be a thorn on the side, for nearly a decade with its VS20xx line of products. Bring it back earth. Not only will it isolate and improve the product but it might even to create a positive mindset with developers, old and new. I suggest that a good portion of the negative mindset is based on QA issues like this. Or do they really have a strategy that depends on a new development market that don't have a concern (or have less a concern) for these issues purely based on "expected" powerful micro-computer (relatively speaking) to hide all their performance issues? Its really odd and only makes you wonder. IMV, these are all side issues that really should not be part of the VS product development. Its not an odd-ball considering. Not everything needs to be under the IDE and not everyone builds with the IDE - I know we don't when it comes to production. Look at what happen to browsers where its moving to multi-process per web site. Still integrated, but process managed which you can drag and split from the main manager. Chrome has this framework and its very stable and super fast. IE is doing the same thing, if not already in the current version. In summary, it isn't that people don't want to upgrade, get new hardware, try out the beta or gamma versions of VS, thousands have, but they are cutting off a thousands more who can provide QA feedback simply because the requirements are different, and they see these negative issues in the forums and blogs or experienced themselves in the past and thus decided to listen and hold back, all which seems, IMV in large part, unnecessary. Anyway, custom install is what I did in the past and that might explain some problems. Who knows, but default FULL or recommended Installation seems to help resolve some issues (obviously) you may grow weary to figure out anymore. Come on, personally pure V++ compiling even with the better C++ lint, should be 3-5 times slower because there is some odd passive sub-system dependency that doesn't apply to your development - or does it - mums the word. :) That can fixed I think. The intellisense, stuff, which I don't know what needs to be fixed them, but its so horrendous that I turned it off and everything else off in the IDE that seems to slow things down. So I ask, if people need to turn things off just to be "ok", then a) whats the point? and b) when/does it get fixed? You know the incentive to fix thing at the first shot level isn't coming from the engineers because they most likely have monster machines and they developed the VS under these conditions and thus miss these issues. Do they keep around an older machine but still relative possible to be part of the market place to test themselves? I'm not talking about sending it to QA or beta testers, test themselves and see how their stuff performs in relative older machines? A small effort like this can save MILLIONS of dollars across the board for MS and her customers. -- Giovanni Dicanio wrote: > "Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio > news:OIAywMAuKHA.6124(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > >> Wouldn't it be nice if MS will package a "VS2010 Lite"? >> >> - Resource Editor, MFC class wizard >> - Compiler >> - Linker >> - Debugger > > What you are asking here seems to me a C++-only focused IDE, in other > words, the philosophy: we don't use .NET so we don't want to pay for it. > Just like VC6 was: just pure C++ (VB6 was a *different* IDE). > > Instead, since VS.NET 2003 the trend seems to be: every language (from > C++ to C# to VB.NET to F#, to ASP.NET, etc.) share the same IDE. > > I may be wrong, but I believe that Microsoft is not going back to the > "C++-only" IDE. > > However, when you install VS2010, you can choose what components to > install and what not. > For example, I excluded ASP.NET/web development from the VS2010 RC > installation. > What about installing C++ only? > > Giovanni > > > -- HLS
From: Giovanni Dicanio on 28 Feb 2010 11:09
"Hector Santos" <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio news:O9LmOPHuKHA.5384(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Not everything needs to be under the IDE and not everyone builds with the > IDE - I know we don't when it comes to production. What tool do you use? BTW: I'm aware that the device-driver developers don't (can't) use the VS IDE. Giovanni |