Any reason to keep Visual Studio 6 around?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

_B - 05 Jul 2005 08:09 GMT

I'm trying to clear space on a laptop. Currently have Visual Studio 6
+ MSDN 98, AND VS2003 + recent MSDN. I had kept the older VS6 due to
some legacy apps with odd code that had trouble compiling under VS2003
(a long story...I didn't write the code, and it has to link with the
author's ActiveX modules).

Anyway, I'm thinking that aside from some details like that, VS 2003
will probably compile most of the legacy VC++ code. Can anyone think
of any reason to keep it around? (I'm trying to clear space on a
laptop drive to load VS 2005 beta 2).

Reply to this Message

Martin Richter [MVP] - 05 Jul 2005 09:55 GMT

Hallo _B!

> I'm trying to clear space on a laptop. Currently have Visual Studio 6
> + MSDN 98, AND VS2003 + recent MSDN. I had kept the older VS6 due to
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> of any reason to keep it around? (I'm trying to clear space on a
> laptop drive to load VS 2005 beta 2).

The differences betwen VC6 and VC7.1 are sometimes great, sometimes you
can compile code without a warning and it works, but some code need a
lot of changes specially when you used some templates that are so simple.

We still use VC6 for our legacy code and we will not port it.
All new products are in VC.NET 2003 and we will jump on 2005 when
available and no longer beta!

Signature

Martin Richter [MVP] WWJD
"In C we had to code our own bugs. In C++ we can inherit them."
FAQ : http://www.mpdvc.de
Samples: http://www.codeguru.com http://www.codeproject.com

Reply to this Message

_B - 06 Jul 2005 02:44 GMT

>Hallo _B!
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>can compile code without a warning and it works, but some code need a
>lot of changes specially when you used some templates that are so simple.

I was afraid you were going to say that. Yeah, most of my own code
willl compile under 2003 without much problem, and I've been writing
mostly C# lately. So I was hoping to get by with VS.NET 2003.

AND...I want to get up to speed on C++/CLI, which means loading VS
2005 beta 2.

And...associated MSDNs.

All in all, LOTs of disk space. I have room on the devel stations,
but not on the laptop. I'm having trouble puzzling out what I can
erase to make space for 2005 beta 2.

>We still use VC6 for our legacy code and we will not port it.
>All new products are in VC.NET 2003 and we will jump on 2005 when
>available and no longer beta!

If 2005 release was available I could probably just ditch VS 2003, but
I'm not sure how stable 2005 beta2 is -- any opinions from anyone?

Reply to this Message

James Park - 06 Jul 2005 04:49 GMT

> If 2005 release was available I could probably just ditch VS 2003, but
> I'm not sure how stable 2005 beta2 is -- any opinions from anyone?

Beta 2 has done everything I've thrown at it, but I'm just one guy, and it's
always risky to toss aside a release quality product for a beta.

Reply to this Message

Carl Daniel [VC++ MVP] - 06 Jul 2005 05:02 GMT

> If 2005 release was available I could probably just ditch VS 2003, but
> I'm not sure how stable 2005 beta2 is -- any opinions from anyone?

Beta 2 is pretty stable, but it is beta, so you still get all that comes
along with that.

-cd

Reply to this Message

_B - 06 Jul 2005 11:01 GMT

>> If 2005 release was available I could probably just ditch VS 2003, but
>> I'm not sure how stable 2005 beta2 is -- any opinions from anyone?
>
>Beta 2 is pretty stable, but it is beta, so you still get all that comes
>along with that.

I think I've carved enough temp space for 2005, but i'm not sure about
the attendant MSDN 2005. That may be important considering that myh
whole purpose is jumping to C++/CLI. Can VS2003 work with MSDN 2005
or is that too much confusion?

I'd still like to leave VS 2003 due to some production code that needs
to remain stable, but of course the MSDN has no direct bearing on the
code itself.

Reply to this Message

Any reason to keep Visual Studio 6 around?

Free Magazines