On 22 August 2014 20:18, Óscar Fuentes <o...@wanadoo.es> wrote: > I second this. My experience with VS is that new features are usually > broken if you go beyond the simple cases. And the roadmaps have little > credibility, based on a continuous flow of disappointments since... > forever.
Is there any interest from Microsoft to actually fix those problems, or is that their policy that what's there is there? The latter seems to be their policy on other products, and for what I know, VS too. I ask that because holding on partial and broken support that will never be fixed or completed is kind of backwards. I'm not a Windows guy, but I wonder why so many people use MSVC if the support is so patchy and hopeless as most people seem to imply. Also, compiling Clang with MSVC and making Clang MSVC compatible are two completely different things. A commercial toolchain based on MSVC compatibility doesn't necessarily need to be compiled with MSVC itself. Or maybe the Windows environment is so alien that I'm basing my points on completely unreasonable assumptions... cheers, -renato _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
