|
|
Most probably company policy, licenses, and/or legacy code.
<font face="Helvetica" size="1">Nuclear launch detected</font>
|
|
|
|
|
that's all those C/C++ developers out there.
|
|
|
|
|
Not that my group uses it, but we have projects that are still active and have quite a bit of code "stuck" on VB6. Automatically porting or migrating the code is not as easy as keeping vb.net/c# code up to date. So its there as legacy, but it's still being used to implement fixes or minor enhancements. I wish they would migrate for simplicity sake, but there is no allotted development budget to do so (surprise, surprise). I would expect that to be the reason why there is a blip at version 6.
|
|
|
|
|
We still use that a lot. It's not worth spending a man year to port a million lines of VC6 C++/MFC code to 2008.
John
|
|
|
|
|
John M. Drescher wrote: a man year to port a million lines of VC6 C++/MFC code to 2008
I've done it a couple of times already - it is not that hard at all and the chances are a new compiler will actually reveal bugs that you need to fix anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: chances are a new compiler will actually reveal bugs that you need to fix anyway
So true. And chances are also that new library versions can bring some bugs to the surface, causing incorrect code that passed the test yesterday to fail randomly at customers having that rare system option turned on. And these bugs can be really hard to find.
That said, it's not easy to give a recommendation on the topic.
|
|
|
|
|
I am way more shocked at the 45% number for the beta compiler.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Visual Studio 2010 is not a Beta it is in Full Release
|
|
|
|
|
jtaylor1126 wrote: Full Release
Full release but still beta quality. Wait till at least SP1 to get the release quality version.
John
|
|
|
|
|
I would say that 2010 is better than beta quality. Yes there are a few problems, but that happens with all products. We are already producing our major enterprise applications using 2010. The benefits of .NET 4 give 2010 the leg up.
|
|
|
|
|
You underestimate the power of the dark side of the code: legacy.
We have ported most of our applications to 2008, but a couple of the bigger one would require more work that is worth (or that we can afford) at the moment.
After all, I hear there are still some COBOL applications running around somewhere. In comparison, VC6 is still brand new!
|
|
|
|
|
Remember, there are many unlucky souls that maintain lagecy code.
|
|
|
|
|
but you can build the same code using vs2010
d{^__^}b - it's time to fly
|
|
|
|
|
Only if that were true. Each new compiler broke backward compatibility a bit with the improved adherence to the standard. So moving to a new compiler may be a bit of work. Years ago I moved 500K lines of my code + codeproject code used in my applications from VC6 to VS2003. That took over 3 months of my time. The biggest problems were templates and MFC and making changes in the codeproject code. If I remember correctly there were 1 to 3 thousand individual changes needed. This code still sits at VS2003.
John
modified on Thursday, June 3, 2010 8:31 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is easier said than done. I wish upgrading was that simple.
|
|
|
|
|
yes i still use it sometimes on old projects needing updates or bug corrections
|
|
|
|
|
Most of the code I write is hardware related. Have you ever tried VS2010 on a 486 with a 500MB HD. VS6 for the Old? VS2010 for anything new. If there were limitless time and money I sure most of us would plump for the new shinny things "Ipad anyone", but most of the time its as cheep and as quick as possible
Why is it when you are busy everyone whats it yesterday, But when your not no-one has any work for you?
|
|
|
|
|
VB6 refuses to give up the ghost.
|
|
|
|
|
d{^__^}b - it's time to fly
|
|
|
|