1,649
社区成员
发帖
与我相关
我的任务
分享大家来发表以下看法（MFC是不是要淘汰了）！！
请各位发表以下看法
听说微软出了一些新东东，MFC的终结品，
我有点迷惑，究竟
MFC还有没有值得我们去啃的价值？
我很想好好的学一下MFC ？？？？？
会不会是学一些淘汰品呀！！！？
听说微软出了一些新东东，MFC的终结品，
我有点迷惑，究竟
MFC还有没有值得我们去啃的价值？
我很想好好的学一下MFC ？？？？？
会不会是学一些淘汰品呀！！！？
...全文
请发表友善的回复…
发表回复
sunyuan_01 2003-01-18
- 打赏
- 举报
管不了
想学java
想学java
tyzyx 2003-01-17
- 打赏
- 举报
MFC, ATL, and WFC—Is MFC Dead?
Ever since Microsoft released the Active Template Library (ATL) as part of Visual C++, Windows developers have speculated that the Microsoft Foundation Class Library (MFC) was no longer "en vogue" at Microsoft and that future efforts would focus on newer libraries such as ATL. Recently, Microsoft released another class library, Windows Foundation Classes (WFC), for Java Windows developers, which has unfortunately helped to fan the rumors that "MFC is dead."
The rumors of MFC's demise are definitely premature. Visual C++ 6.0 has added significant functionality to MFC and ATL in parallel, which indicates that both libraries will receive equal attention moving forward. Part of the problem is that the design goals of each library are sometimes not clearly stated and therefore are not clearly understood by the Visual C++ developer. MFC is designed to be a great class library for creating graphically rich, sophisticated Windows applications. ATL is designed to make it easy to create extremely lightweight COM objects and ActiveX controls. Each of these design goals has resulted in a different library to empower the developer.
Another common misconception is that MFC and ATL are mutually exclusive. This is definitely not the case! In fact, it is very easy to create ATL-based COM objects that use MFC. The only issue is that since many developers choose ATL for its lightweight nature, using MFC, which is feature-rich and "heavy," seems to contradict the reason for choosing ATL. While this might be the case for some developers, it doesn't make ATL and MFC mutually exclusive.
While ATL does not replace MFC, we do think it is an important part of Visual C++, so in this edition of Programming Microsoft Visual C++ we have added two chapters that cover the ATL class libraries.
Ever since Microsoft released the Active Template Library (ATL) as part of Visual C++, Windows developers have speculated that the Microsoft Foundation Class Library (MFC) was no longer "en vogue" at Microsoft and that future efforts would focus on newer libraries such as ATL. Recently, Microsoft released another class library, Windows Foundation Classes (WFC), for Java Windows developers, which has unfortunately helped to fan the rumors that "MFC is dead."
The rumors of MFC's demise are definitely premature. Visual C++ 6.0 has added significant functionality to MFC and ATL in parallel, which indicates that both libraries will receive equal attention moving forward. Part of the problem is that the design goals of each library are sometimes not clearly stated and therefore are not clearly understood by the Visual C++ developer. MFC is designed to be a great class library for creating graphically rich, sophisticated Windows applications. ATL is designed to make it easy to create extremely lightweight COM objects and ActiveX controls. Each of these design goals has resulted in a different library to empower the developer.
Another common misconception is that MFC and ATL are mutually exclusive. This is definitely not the case! In fact, it is very easy to create ATL-based COM objects that use MFC. The only issue is that since many developers choose ATL for its lightweight nature, using MFC, which is feature-rich and "heavy," seems to contradict the reason for choosing ATL. While this might be the case for some developers, it doesn't make ATL and MFC mutually exclusive.
While ATL does not replace MFC, we do think it is an important part of Visual C++, so in this edition of Programming Microsoft Visual C++ we have added two chapters that cover the ATL class libraries.
qing_li73 2003-01-17
- 打赏
- 举报
No everlasting tool exists in the world
qing_li73 2003-01-17
- 打赏
- 举报
what most important lies in ur thinking , not the special tools
Plando 2003-01-17
- 打赏
- 举报
请问楼主，MFC
有没有去啃的价值，
如果没有，
我要学VC
该学些什么东东！！？
3q！！！！！！！！！
有没有去啃的价值，
如果没有，
我要学VC
该学些什么东东！！？
3q！！！！！！！！！
突击召唤师 2003-01-17
- 打赏
- 举报
有些东西确实过时了，不过目前用的还挺广泛。而且对于VC来说，没有看到完善的替代品。
demetry 2003-01-17
- 打赏
- 举报
楼上说的
MFC之于编程就向，鼠标之于计算机一样
虽然我也最偏爱MFC，不过我觉得你的话太绝对了。任何一种工业产品（包括软件），都有自己的生命周期和使用范围。我很同意qing_li73(bluemoon)，关键在于培养自己思考问题的方法。MS开发的那么多工具，侧重点不同，应用范围不同，但是MS编程的总体风格和程序设计方式几乎是一致的。
MFC之于编程就向，鼠标之于计算机一样
虽然我也最偏爱MFC，不过我觉得你的话太绝对了。任何一种工业产品（包括软件），都有自己的生命周期和使用范围。我很同意qing_li73(bluemoon)，关键在于培养自己思考问题的方法。MS开发的那么多工具，侧重点不同，应用范围不同，但是MS编程的总体风格和程序设计方式几乎是一致的。
fengge008 2003-01-17
- 打赏
- 举报
昨天比尔.盖茨 亲自给我打电话告诉我，MFC迟早要被淘汰（没有什么东西是永恒的），但最近几年不会被淘汰的。
isdong 2003-01-17
- 打赏
- 举报
只能越来越流行！！！！！！！！！
MFC之于编程就向，鼠标之于计算机一样；
有了MFC编程变得简单多了，有了鼠标操作起来也舒服多了；
但没有了MFC一样编程，没有了鼠标一样玩电脑
MFC之于编程就向，鼠标之于计算机一样；
有了MFC编程变得简单多了，有了鼠标操作起来也舒服多了；
但没有了MFC一样编程，没有了鼠标一样玩电脑
康斯坦汀 2003-01-17
- 打赏
- 举报
很多的windows下的著名商业软件都是基于MFC开发的，
比如：ms office, symantec pcanywhere....
淘汰是一定的，但短期不会。
比如：ms office, symantec pcanywhere....
淘汰是一定的，但短期不会。
gotoyangjm 2003-01-17
- 打赏
- 举报
放心啃吧，我昨天与 比尔.盖茨 通电话了，起码还可以玩几年！
