|
3 of the last 4 jobs I have had all involve C++. Two involved both C++ and C#. My current position is as a C++ software developer. I always hear it is dying but I don't see that really happening. We are just not as flashy as the Web devs. 
|
|
|
|
|
A niche where C++ could fit, I think, is in the field of webapis. Picture a RESTful service that does the heavy processing efficiently as only a good piece of C++ code can do. Front ends (for web or mobile) can be done using C# or Java or Swift. When you install these webapis to the cloud, it would mean (at least theoretically) less memory and probably less CPU usage (if the C++ code is optimized), which would translate in less resources and a less expensive Azure bill.
But I haven't seen a framework for C++ webapis apart from half-baked projects that stopped active development long ago. So unless you want to go creating ISAPI extensions or good old CGIs, I don't see it happening anytime soon.
As for desktop development, Microsoft won't upgrade MFC nor will opensource it, and neither Qt nor C++/CX are actually standard C++ (and WinRT seems too much complicated to invest in a sandboxed environment) so I don't think C++ will come back to desktop anytime soon. Plus, Microsoft doesn't seem interested in desktop development aside from their UWP, essentially dooming (IMO) desktop apps.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think MS is dooming Desktop apps, the Web & Cloud is.
Besides, there are heavy apps that can only work properly on desktops, e. g. Photoshop, Cad, C++ IDEs 
And, you wouldn't make such apps in WinRT.
Also, there are apps which are simply incompatible with UWP, e. g. Browsers & File managers.
To summarize, UWP is OK as long as you don't fall into one of the above categories, but I really don't see a lot of C++ devs jumping into that boat, it definitely for dotneters.
BTW, your statement about Qt not being standard C++ is kind of strange, Qt is not a C++ dialect, it's a framework. The C++ in Qt is as standard as your compiler assures
|
|
|
|
|
|
So glad I can watch this 45 minute, invaluable video. I would be lost, and probably in jail, if it were not for this important training aide.
|
|
|
|
|
Do they at least still include the part where you slap someone in the face with a glove and agree upon a meeting with witnesses at dawn? That used to be the best part when someone violated the code of conduct.
"You, sir, are a scoundrel and a liar. Choose your weapons."
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
I also completed one of those couple of weeks back as the deadline was approaching for that training to be done.
|
|
|
|
|
When I did my training the whole of it was peppered with the word 'appropriate'.
There were no rules as to what was acceptable and what was not, outside of what is 'appropriate' in any given business environment for the culture that business environment finds itself in.
So basically the training was "don't be a bad boy, however we won't tell you what 'bad' is as it should be obvious to you!"
A complete waste of 45 minutes!
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
I get to watch that stuff as well as diversity training and the sales department training on the illegality of side deals.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm thinking like a wedding taking place where some folks could be interested in watching the live stream, perhaps because they are too busy or not feeling well (e.g., an infirm) to attend. At the bare minimum, it would have to be a cameraman, a key grip / M.C., and a network tech that makes sure the stream is being done properly and can answer calls from folks watching the stream who are having issues. It would seem that this could be done by any tech shop, at a price of no more than $250/hr. I wonder how such a place would be advertised.
modified 19-Mar-18 16:39pm.
|
|
|
|
|
swampwiz wrote: or not feeling well (e.g., an infirm) to attend
I can watched the damned video after, can't I? Or can't we celebrate the funeral without my live attendance?
How much would YOU spend on such a service? How many videos have been buried without ever being watched again?
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure but I have watched live streamed events for years. It's called TV.
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer.
The End
|
|
|
|
|
Not worth any money to me.
I expect anyone who might be interested would actually prefer to watch it later, not live.
|
|
|
|
|
Many legal factors to consider for this, I would think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a business market for nearly everything nowadays. How big the market is ? don't know.
I would not do it on both side (stream an event or watch it live if unable to attend)
Mostly because doing a "live" non scripted event is insanely difficult; and the result are sh*tty at best, and really sh*tty at worse.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
Why would you think watching such an event "live" is so important, even a sick MIL would be happy to watch the video after the event rather than spend $1k to watch live.
I think your audience is in your wishful thinking.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
250 per hour? And you expect to "take calls" to help people solve their streaming issues?
I could have l'il grandma at the wedding to live-stream the whole thing on facebook or youtube for free. Oh wait, there's going to be a dozen people already doing that anyways, including l'il grandma.
|
|
|
|
|
Use 1-NET, it gets what you'd like to have and cost orders of magnitude less 
|
|
|
|
|
You'd get a bigger audience streaming the wedding night.
Just sayin'.
|
|
|
|
|
How sad is it that myself and a coworker of mine are both pretty excited right now, after finding out that the next release of Windows is finally bringing a customizable setting so you can choose to NOT automatically hide scrollbars?
Who ever thought hiding scrollbars was a great idea in the first place?
|
|
|
|
|
That is how you keep animals excited : deprive them of something they like and are used to, and give it back to them after a little while.
For us it is working the same, except that we are sometimes even willing to pay to have them back.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: Who ever thought hiding scrollbars was a great idea in the first place?
I've got an idea.
How about using eye pupil tracking... as you look over to the edge of the screen Cortana can make the scrollbar visible OR if you move the mouse over to the edge of the screen it becomes visible.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
If it's only hidden when you're not looking at it, then why bother hiding it at all? 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
See,
The point here is to confuse future philosophers. The Creator of the Universe probably had this same discussion when they were designing trees in the forest.
"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"[^]
Windows users will someday utter phrases like "Do you think the scrollbar is still there when we are not looking at it?"
I better get my coat... this thread may soon turn into soapbox material. 
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
