Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Interview With Herb Sutter

Posted by Hemos on from the working-with-the-crowd dept.

Anonymous Coward writes "Herb Sutter, a C++ luminary, recently joined Microsoft's Developer Platform and Evangelism Division, where he acts as a liaison between Microsoft and the C++ developer community. In this interview he speaks about his new job, the role of C++ in the .NET framework, and the current state of C++."

4 of 166 comments (clear)

  1. ANSI C++ compliance by YeeHaW_Jelte · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I find it pretty strange that the same guy who is secretary in the standards committe now works for a company that market a definetly non-standard compatible C++ developement suite.
    I've worked with Visual Studio in the past, and was always irritated by the microsoft-specific stuff and especially the automatically generated code, which is inserted at compilation time and thus can't be read or seen. I don't like using mystery code in my appilications.

    --

    ---
    "The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
    1. Re:ANSI C++ compliance by David+Kennedy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Get it right people; it's an ISO standard, not an ANSI standard. If nothing else this is a useful interview answer!

      As for Herb Sutter - I believe him when he says he's to going to compromise his standards work. I don't believe MS, but Herb Sutter's books have earned him my respect.

  2. Re:VC++ will provide what the community needs... by TummyX · · Score: 3, Insightful


    So... when are we going to see the linux kernel compiled on VC++?

    Considering the linux kernel uses non standardised GCC extensions...i doubt it.

  3. Re:Might just be me by Harri · · Score: 5, Insightful
    it seems.. well.. wrong, for someone recommending the C++ standard to be part of ANY commercial company who's job it is to write C++ code.

    The C++ language is _for_ people who write C++ code. Are you seriously suggesting that the majority of the users of a language should be banned from participating in the standards process, because they get money for doing their job?

    I am hoping you really meant that the people who write the compilers should not be allowed input: but even this is impractical, since nobody wants a standard full of features which turn out in practice to be unimplementable.