RE: Follow up Question: When Will Xerces-C Provide .NET project f iles ???

[Jesse Pelton <js...@PKC.com>]

It sounds like you mean "Visual Studio .NET" and not the whole .NET package
when you say ".NET." If you're using VS .NET to develop unmanaged C++ code,
using Xerces makes sense (as long as Microsoft allows unmanaged C++ code to
remain a viable option).
 
I agree that VS .NET is a worthwhile upgrade. The libraries (STL in
particular, but MFC as well) are much improved.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Herb Chong [mailto:herbie@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 10:20 AM
To: xerces-c-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: RE: Follow up Question: When Will Xerces-C Provide .NET project f
iles ???



>>>>>Why use Xerces with .NET? My understanding is that the .NET framework
implements the DOM (not to mention stuff like canonicalization and XML
Signature, neither of which appears to be on Xerces' radar). Perhaps by
"moving to .NET" you mean "moving to Visual Studio .NET," and not buying
into the whole managed p-code assemblies framework thing.

because .NET has a new and ANSI compliant STL, plus i have been unable to
get
the latest official release to run, although it compiles and links with
my application. i have to rebuild Xerces with .NET to run.

Herb....

Re: Follow up Question: When Will Xerces-C Provide .NET project f iles ???

[Gert van Spijker <ge...@ab-graph.com>]

<snip>

> (as long as Microsoft allows unmanaged C++ code to remain a viable
option).

Surely they will have to? It may be possible to write an application in C#
but how would you write a driver, a web server or an OS?

Gert


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-c-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-c-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Follow up Question: When Will Xerces-C Provide .NET project f iles ???

[Robert Buck <rb...@mathworks.com>]

Hi all,

... No, I just mean the Visual Studio .NET project files. I do realize that 
you can upgrade the project files from the GUI. But once I do that, then 
_I_ have to check those created files into source control, which is another 
maintenance item that _we_ need to manage.

The automated build and test (BaT) is a huge distributed system involving 
several architectures and compilers. It does _not_ have a gui in the 
traditional sense (except the web page showing status of the various queues 
involved with BaT), so having BaT open a Visual Studio session to convert a 
project is not an option if such a convert session involves clicking 
buttons in dialog boxes. There is no GUI in BaT. These are primarily rack 
mounted systems without monitors and keyboards, and using network 
appliances. See my point?

If Xerces were to provide additional project files for Visual Studio .NET, 
perhaps in a directory named "xerces-c-src1_7_0\Projects\Build\Win32\vc7", 
life would be simpler since all we would need to do is just build the 
project from the command line in the usual Visual Studio way.

Has anyone tried building a Visual Studio 6.0 project using Studio .NET 
command line tools yet? I am about to try this and was wondering what other 
peoples experience was.

-Bob


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-c-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-c-dev-help@xml.apache.org