Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 354 posts

Re: Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

#201

Post by mort96 »

jeroenhd wrote: post #168
concerndc1tizen wrote: post #23

Do you guys ever feel tired of 'sounding the alarm'? I feel like I've been doing that for years on a wide range of topics, but every time it's like you're talking to cult members. How do you break through to people? People say things like "you're overthinking it", "that's never going to happen", "I don't care because I like using VSCode and not alternatives". Is it individualism? That they only consider their own nar…

What's the problem for people who just use VSCode, exactly? The software still does what people want for free, which is what 99% of VS Code users use the software for anyway. People who care about open source-ness have their own extensions to replace their proprietary C++ tooling, or they can use an open source alternative like Eclipse. I remember when basic features that come for free in VS Code cost thousands of do…

For people who see VS Code as just a decent gratis text editor, there's no problem.

For people who care, to some degree, about using an open source tool, for whom the marketing that VS Code is open source played a role in their choice of using it, it should matter. And it matters that other projects (think Platform IO and more) choose VS Code as a platform to build on top of, and they get away with it because "it's open source".

Re: Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

#202

Post by Adverblessly »

bryancoxwell wrote: post #76
jonstewart wrote: post #13

The hilarious part is that old fart C++ programmers (like me) have been the ones most leery of VS Code. Microsoft’s gonna Microsoft, ‘specially with compilers.

What do you prefer to VSCode? Just started a job where I’ll be working in C++ and looking for alternatives

Not the parent, but for C++ I like QtCreator.

Re: Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

#203

Post by mort96 »

chenzhekl wrote: post #187

I don't like MS, either. BUT, let's be clear. No one is to obligated to work for free on OSS, not even big companies like MS. They have the right to constraint them to work on their own platforms. If you don't like it, you should fork the previous unconstrained versions or develop your own C/C++ add-on rather than complaining that MS stopped supporting your favorite extension.

"It's not illegal for them to do this bad thing" is such a common defense of companies doing bad things, as if it was the legality and not the ethics that was being discussed. I don't get it.

Re: Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

#204

Post by fsloth »

hnfong wrote: post #155
fsloth wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not how companies see it. From MS point of view it’s Cursor doing it to them . The way copyright and other rights to your IP you claim to have work in practice, is you need to enforce those claims or loose the rights.

> The way copyright and other rights to your IP you claim to have work in practice, is you need to enforce those claims or loose the rights. Generally only applies to trademarks, not copyrights. In most English speaking countries copyright is a proprietary right and you don't lose it if you don't actively enforce it. But there could be time limits to a plaintiff bringing a civil case to court (usually a couple years)…

No copyright alone afaik stops anyone from abusing said rights unless you tell them to stop.

Would be happy to have counterexamples.

Re: Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

#205

Post by cess11 »

znpy wrote: post #188
cess11 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm something of a vim fanatic because Emacs was sluggish, but these days have to admit that the multicore support turned out fine and the difference isn't that big anymore.

Uh, not only that. I recently updated from emacs 29 to emacs 30 where native compilation is enabled by default and it’s much much faster. Like, noticeably faster.

Ah, nice. Definitely time for me to carve out a few hours and try it out again, then.

Who knows, maybe I'll have closed the circle in a year and gone back to Emacs full time, where I started off in the editor wars a quarter of a century ago.

Re: Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

#206

Post by dharmab »

pests wrote: post #185
dharmab wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a great doc on exactly how Zed handles syntax and intellisense-style completions: https://zed.dev/docs/configuring-languages Debugging isn't in yet, but is actively being worked on and planned for public release before 1.0: https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/issues/5065 , there's an active channel in their Discord discussing the development of the feature.

That first link doesn’t really explain anything about syntax/autocomplete. It’s just about config options per language (formatted, linter, lsp) but I guess I was expecting something else?

It explains it in clear terms:

"""

Zed's language support is built on two main technologies:

    Tree-sitter: This handles syntax highlighting and structure-based features like the outline panel.
    Language Server Protocol (LSP): This provides semantic features such as code completion and diagnostics.
These components work together to provide Zed's language capabilities.

"""

Note this is _not_ how VSC's C++ Intellisense works. The VSC C++ plugin uses proprietary features of MSVC, it doesn't use LSP.

Re: Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

#207

Post by bombcar »

aggieNick02 wrote: post #106
ohgr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Was a Microsoft dev from 1992 until 2017. Won’t touch them now because I spent my entire career rewriting rug pulls. It paid off a mortgage and fed me well but it was a bad outcome for my orgs and customers. If anyone remembers WCF/AppFabric/WWF and Silverlight, that was the last stack I rewrote someone out of the shit on.

There was a lot of hype and momentum around Silverlight back in the day, until their wasn't. You got a cross-platform (Mac/Windows) WPF-like UI and C# programming environment, which was powerful. I had the fortune to be involved developing the LEGO Mindstorms EV3 programming software. Under the hood, it was a small web browser shell (using Mono on Mac and WPF on Windows) around a Silverlight Out-of-Browser app. Anyth…

There was a hot minute (and it was about a minute!) where Silverlight was absolutely phenomenal.

Too bad “every app is just a website” took over because of the cross-platform issues.

Re: Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

#208

Post by ryao »

Am I the only person using tmux+vim+cscope+bash+gcc as a development environment? I do not see the need for these GUIs. I also can develop software from just about anywhere as I only need to SSH into a machine with these things (+git) installed. There are no hostile license terms either.

As an added bonus, this setup is excellent for pair programming. Just use voice chat via signal or anything else and have the other person connect to the same tmux session over SSH.

That said, if you must use a GUI based development environment, I know of people happily using netbeans. I am not sure why anyone would use Microsoft’s tools for this.

Re: Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

#209

Post by grobbyy »

bangaladore wrote: post #5

To be clear, I'm don't like the Microsoft has a proprietary Marketplace, but a company openly violating the terms of use for their own profit is a bit much in my opinion. > Cursor allegedly has been flouting Microsoft terms-of-service rules for some time now by setting up a reverse proxy to mask its network requests to the endpoints used by the Microsoft Visual Studio Marketplace. This allows Cursor users to install…

Terms of service often contain illegal provisions. I teach kids to flout them too. One of the biggest sins in school is kids learn to follow rules uncritically.

There are specific protections allowed when the goal is to maintain / break compatibility. If Microsoft locks competitors out, competitors are quite often permitted to pick the lock.

I can't comment on this situation since I don't know the details, but it's very likely this is fully legal.

See Oracle / Java API lawsuit, garage door opener suit, etc. To see where the lines sit.

Re: Microsoft subtracts C/C++ extension from VS Code forks

#210

Post by bombcar »

globnomulous wrote: post #119
mrj wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started my career rewriting a product using Microsoft's DNA business server with Java and never looked back. I'm shocked this keeps happening, honestly. I guess I'm a "never again" sort but surprised there's not more companies refusing to deal with Microsoft. Due to experiences like that I refused to buy volume licenses from them, too. Sometime later I got an audit demand for which I had a reply ready. "lol, no."

Sorry if I'm being dense, but what is an "audit demand?" (Looked it up and couldn't find anything obviously relevant.)

An Enterprise customer of Microsoft agrees to be audited by MS. In exchange they pay a certain amount for effectively “unlimited use” of the appropriate software. In the past this meant volume license keys that would always activate; wouldn’t count how many devices, etc.

And MS audit would check that what you reported was what you had. And could result in big increases in contract pricing.

Now that everything is cloud this and 365 that I don’t know how much it applies anymore - everything is dynamic and traceable.

Famously in the early 2000s it was a huge issue for “medium” businesses who had used enterprise-style licensing. Tiny and small businesses just bought normal computers and software and would often escape notice.

Post reply on HN