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

Visual Studio 2013

blogs.msdn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 201 posts

Re: Visual Studio 2013

#31

Post by sriramk »

CoolGuySteve wrote: post #22

I wish they would dedicate more time to improving cl.exe and link.exe in terms of performance and language support and less time with these hokey team visualization gimics. Every release since 2008 has been getting slower and slower for C++, the C compiler is awful, PGO instrumentation in Win8 is less capable, and there's no equivalents in the Windows ecosystem to gcc's likely/unlikely, oprofile, or valgrind. It's at…

ex-VS person here (from 5 years ago though).

It is never an either-or. It is always a complex mix of what customers ask for, what the strategic priorities/market realities are.

Often the problem with these queries is that there are not enough devs complaining to MSFT. No PM/engg manager is going to ignore a bug/problem if it shows up high in customer requests.

On promotions - I think it's the reverse problem. People only get promoted for working on something that's perceived to be hard.

Re: Visual Studio 2013

#32

Post by FactoryFactory »

jblow wrote: post #19
jblow wrote: post #17

Yet another Visual Studio, yet another truckload of "features" that do nothing to help day-to-day, heavy-lifting programmers. (And which probably help by adding bugs or just bloating the system). Sigh. I am hoping they have made substantial improvements that are not mentioned in this blog post.

... though I guess if you look at the rationale behind all these features as "get people who buy into these features so tangled up in them that they can't use anything else, or reasonably port their applications to another OS", then it all makes sense. Of course, that is the opposite of what I as a software developer want.

That's like saying Apple put all the features in iPhone so that people can't switch to BlackBerry and doesn't make any sense.

PS: Why not edit your post instead of replying to yourself?

Re: Visual Studio 2013

#33

Post by echohack »

CoolGuySteve wrote: post #22

I wish they would dedicate more time to improving cl.exe and link.exe in terms of performance and language support and less time with these hokey team visualization gimics. Every release since 2008 has been getting slower and slower for C++, the C compiler is awful, PGO instrumentation in Win8 is less capable, and there's no equivalents in the Windows ecosystem to gcc's likely/unlikely, oprofile, or valgrind. It's at…

My assessment:

Gimmicks:

- Popout explorer windows (So you can get the old style Pending Changes window, if you like)

- Make comments and discussions on code through web UI

- New release management plugin

- “Team rooms” allow your team to collaborate on code

"I'm OK with this" improvements:

- “Indicators” in code that give you info about blocks of code

- Cloud load testing

- More agile portfolio management options

- Test cases can be worked on through web UI

Real Improvements:

:(

Re: Visual Studio 2013

#34

Post by MartinCron »

evo_9 wrote: post #21
MartinCron wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nobody is asking for yearly updates for Visual Studio Ahem... I am. I would much rather have smaller more frequent updates to important tools than huge disruptive ones. Short feedback loops are a good thing.

Full new version or Service Packs? I agree with you but a Service Pack should suffice esp. right after you've release a full new version/update to a major product/tool like VS.

The full version vs. service pack distinction doesn't really matter to me.

Re: Visual Studio 2013

#35

Post by FactoryFactory »

CoolGuySteve wrote: post #22

I wish they would dedicate more time to improving cl.exe and link.exe in terms of performance and language support and less time with these hokey team visualization gimics. Every release since 2008 has been getting slower and slower for C++, the C compiler is awful, PGO instrumentation in Win8 is less capable, and there's no equivalents in the Windows ecosystem to gcc's likely/unlikely, oprofile, or valgrind. It's at…

From the first few lines of the article:

> As usual, there’s so much I will only be able to just skim the surface with this post. Stay tuned for many more posts on my blog, the ALM blog, the Visual Studio blog and others as we reveal more detailed information about all of the new capabilities.

>I will not, in this post, be talking about many of the new VS 2013 features that are unrelated to the Application Lifecycle workflows. Stay tuned for more about the rest of the VS 2013 capabilities at the Build conference.

Re: Visual Studio 2013

#36

Post by Permit »

jblow wrote: post #17

Yet another Visual Studio, yet another truckload of "features" that do nothing to help day-to-day, heavy-lifting programmers. (And which probably help by adding bugs or just bloating the system). Sigh. I am hoping they have made substantial improvements that are not mentioned in this blog post.

Out of curiosity, what kind of improvements would you like to see in Visual Studio?

Re: Visual Studio 2013

#37

Post by quasque »

Luyt wrote: post #27
r4vik wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

menu still shouting

This pisses me off, too. I really should patch the menu resource someday and change it to lowercase. I also don't understand that Microsoft violates its own HID guidelines; shouldn't they set a proper example?

Easier method: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10859173/how-to-disable-a...

Re: Visual Studio 2013

#39

Post by kvb »

jblow wrote: post #17

Yet another Visual Studio, yet another truckload of "features" that do nothing to help day-to-day, heavy-lifting programmers. (And which probably help by adding bugs or just bloating the system). Sigh. I am hoping they have made substantial improvements that are not mentioned in this blog post.

Note that the blog author is part of the Team Foundation Server organization, so it's natural that he's talking about those features and not the programming language and runtime features.

Re: Visual Studio 2013

#40

Post by danbruc »

evo_9 wrote: post #18
glhaynes wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it hurt, though? You say you're not running 2012 yet, so obviously you're not feeling forced to upgrade before you're ready. So why shouldn't they put out the latest bits when they've got them ready and we users can start using them when we're ready?

If you've ever had to maintain a large, legacy .net app that has been around since 1.0 or even has some ASP 'classic' code in it, upgrading is a major nightmare. I know at least two shops right now 'stuck' on 2005 because various problems upgrading to 2008, let alone to 2012 or 2013 now. They are more likely to re-write the whole thing in Ruby at this point. I'm actually running 2012 personally, not such a big deal o…

You can install several versions of Visual Studio side by side - keep an old version for maintaining legacy projects, use a new version for new projects.
Post reply on HN