Oliveira's "new features in Visual Studio" are all programming languages it now supports-- in other words, the development environment is synonymous with the compilers bundled with it.
When I left Windows as a development platform (maybe 10 years ago), it took a while to appreciate how deep the Unix philosophy of "compact, orthogonal tools" really runs. Now, though, it would never occur to me to describe a new compiler as a "feature" of the other tools I use.
I'm not sure that the difference in worldview really matters. I doubt that I'm significantly more productive now than I was with Visual Studio. However, I do feel incredibly straightjacketed whenever I have to go back to VS, as if that monolithic view of software is imposing itself on me, rather than letting me do what I want as I want.
It's a shame the author isn't really distinguishing between Visual Studio 2010 and v4 of the Common Language Runtime / Dynamic Language Runtime.
VS 2010 has some neat integration points but isn't really of interest to the HN community - an in-depth look at v4 (particularly the DLR) however is worth chatting about sometime.
To be honest, what I'm looking forward to most in VS2010 is the revamped IDE, and particularly the Call Heirarchy feature - which shows you the heirarchy of everything your method calls into (and vice versa).
VS is required to develop software that will run on Windows (and that will forever be handcuffed to Windows). I do not wish to develop such an abomination, but many people won't have the same moral objections.
VS is Microsoft's "Office for developers" application. It's only reasonable to tout the features os languages and compilers not available elsewhere from Microsoft as features of the whole thing, because Windows developers have no other option.
VS is required to develop software that will run on Windows
I'm sure the user base of the delightful open source #develop making Windows apps will be sad to hear this, as will everyone using VS to develop against Mono.
Which compilers are part of VS that aren't available elsewhere?
[+] [-] dmlorenzetti|17 years ago|reply
When I left Windows as a development platform (maybe 10 years ago), it took a while to appreciate how deep the Unix philosophy of "compact, orthogonal tools" really runs. Now, though, it would never occur to me to describe a new compiler as a "feature" of the other tools I use.
I'm not sure that the difference in worldview really matters. I doubt that I'm significantly more productive now than I was with Visual Studio. However, I do feel incredibly straightjacketed whenever I have to go back to VS, as if that monolithic view of software is imposing itself on me, rather than letting me do what I want as I want.
[+] [-] wglb|17 years ago|reply
[+] [-] citizenparker|17 years ago|reply
VS 2010 has some neat integration points but isn't really of interest to the HN community - an in-depth look at v4 (particularly the DLR) however is worth chatting about sometime.
[+] [-] AndrewDucker|17 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bep|17 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rbanffy|17 years ago|reply
VS is Microsoft's "Office for developers" application. It's only reasonable to tout the features os languages and compilers not available elsewhere from Microsoft as features of the whole thing, because Windows developers have no other option.
[+] [-] citizenparker|17 years ago|reply
I'm sure the user base of the delightful open source #develop making Windows apps will be sad to hear this, as will everyone using VS to develop against Mono.
Which compilers are part of VS that aren't available elsewhere?