RE: How much C++/CLI syntax do you need to use all of the .NET Frameworks?

Nemanja Trifunovic — Fri, 19 Dec 2003 03:28:00 GMT

"Group (ii) is going to go whole hog using .NET and authoring new types, and is well served by more elegant/sugary syntax. Group (i) is simply going to be consuming the CLI types, probably not author them, and will probably only ever need ^ and gcnew. " I believe you meant the other way around. I use Managed C++ for (i), and all I do is author new __gc types.

RE: How much C++/CLI syntax do you need to use all of the .NET Frameworks?

AlisdairM — Tue, 16 Dec 2003 13:07:00 GMT

"What's more, in the post-Whidbey timeframe when we complete the support for allocating any object (including CLI objects) on the native heap using new, people could actually consume CLI / .NET Frameworks types seamlessly in their application without any new syntax." I'm not sure how relevant this is for the average code-writer, as if you depend on a CLI class, the interface you depend on introduces the CLI syntax, so you are already in a non-ISO world. I guess you can forward declare classes that later turn out to be CLI-based in the implementation, so CLI does not leak through a public interface unless those features are used. However, there is a significant benefit for generic code, as all those templates that manipulate pointers will just work with CLI types as well. That will be a big gain.