Visual Studio 6.0 or Visual Studio .Net 2003
 

Hello All,

I posted this over in the Software Forum, but I realized that maybe it belongs over here.

I have both VS 6.0 and VS .Net 2003 available to me. I am just starting to learn programming
and wanted to know the difference and which one would be the best to start with. My company has a site liscence for both and I could install both on my PC but I didn't know if it would make a difference.

I am starting out with the Book C++ Demystified by Jeff Kent. He is using VS .Net 2003 in his examples.

Your input would be apprecitiated.

Thanks,

Re: Visual Studio 6.0 or Visual Studio .Net 2003
 

I don't know anything about VS.NET, but I do know that MSVC6 was not very standards compliant and it had bugs -- so I wouldn't recommend MSVC6.

Re: Visual Studio 6.0 or Visual Studio .Net 2003
 

visual studio .net 2003 shud be gr8... i ve been programming on that..
but if u re just learning to program then advice u better start off with turbo c or borland c..or c++..
it ll be much better..

Re: Visual Studio 6.0 or Visual Studio .Net 2003
 

I think it would be a great disservice to recommend outdated and obsolete coding for a beginner.

Re: Visual Studio 6.0 or Visual Studio .Net 2003
 

Why??
They really form the basis of all the rest of visual studio etc..
and are really simple to understand all the basics...
work a while on them and then switch to the new gen stuff.. i found it easier that way..

Re: Visual Studio 6.0 or Visual Studio .Net 2003
 

My learning started with turbo C++ 3.0. Infact, in my uni everyone starts from turbo C, C++. Only later they move to vc++ or dev C++. I think learning TC was just a waste of my time, since it's downright obsolete. You will be learning habits that u must unlearn later when u move onto standard compilers. TC is just for windows(actually MSDOS), and I can say this for certain that your code will be non-portable since you will have a nag for using conio.h for just about any program.

My advice is to stay away from turbo C/C++. However, I can safely recommend borland C++ 5.5 which is strictly standard-complaint.

And if you have VS.NET then go for it. Even though I believe the best way to learn programming is without an IDE, it's not a big issue.

Re: Visual Studio 6.0 or Visual Studio .Net 2003
 

>They really form the basis of all the rest of visual studio etc..
Wait, how does Borland software form the basis of Microsoft software? Are you making some silly connection that the rest of us can't see? While you're at it, why not recommend Cfront as long as you're trying to get the OP into archeology?

>and are really simple to understand all the basics...
That's BS. An obsolete POS compiler will hinder understanding because then all of the sudden you slap the beginner with standard and pre-standard language issues. Rather than follow the "older is easier" crap and actually make an attempt to learn the language properly.

>i found it easier that way..
I'd be willing to bet that your knowledge of mordern C++ is remedial at best and filled with pre-standard notions if you found it easier that way.