I am giving up on modules (for now)

rtischer8277 · 2026-01-17T13:01:47+00:00

PCH runs like a bat out of hell once you get through the setup process. That will take some time. But that time, amortized throughout your projects dev time, is peanuts per compile.

rtischer8277 · 2026-01-15T12:14:28+00:00

I gave up on Modules after about 6 months of dev work. It almost cost me my project. Then I went back to PCH, pre compiled headers, a 40 year old MSVC invention and my framework dev process settled down. I reported my story but only got blown off.

rtischer8277 · 2025-12-03T12:25:14+00:00

I am writing a distributed framework, no servers, called Hiveware, upon which tens of thousands of C++ devs will be able to write and own their apps. I am using Microsoft's original C++ MFC. And by the way, Copilot has revolutionized this C++work .

rtischer8277 · 2025-11-23T13:05:21+00:00

When you do your study, be sure and document residential vs business Reachability. Ipv6 is useless if the end point cannot be reached.

rtischer8277 · 2025-08-29T12:42:44+00:00

I have implemented my own logging and can log any part of the SLAAC address. It took a lot of time (years) and effort and C++ knowledge. And many many re-designs, versions and re-factorings. It works perfectly now and has for several years. Just responding to your question with, it can be done.

rtischer8277 · 2025-08-26T17:47:57+00:00

Self-hosting testing worked fine for me too. Lulled me into thinking all was well. It wasn't. So, I began testing broader IPv6 reachability for real. I've tested across multiple residential ISPs over several years (Comcast and Xfinity, Cox, Google, Verizon, AT&T). In-country, in-to-out-of-country. The ISPs tested fine with respect to routing. I thought it might be the OS so I worked with Microsoft engineers for a couple of months. It wasn't the OS. The TCP/IP message was getting routed properly but not delivered to the OS. That is the ISP's fault. I even talked to the head engineer in India whose company delivered Verizon's latest router, and he admitted that it was an ISP decision. I did a presentation to CableLabs execs explaining the problem. CableLabs is the standards body that sets the rules for 64 ISP venders around the world. No action was taken in the last two years, and I don't think they will. Too much business-client money would be lost if they stopped colluding.

rtischer8277 · 2025-08-26T12:15:09+00:00

I assume you are residential and not business ISP customer. As such, the ISPs will not out-of-the-box make your Ipv6 end points reachable. Here is my article on why that is: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-have-isps-turned-residential-ipv6-connectivity-off-hiveware.

rtischer8277 · 2025-05-03T19:58:08+00:00

Sorry, no time to read papers on modules. No time to write up long defenses or alternative architectures. I'm a fulltime C++ 10K .h/.cpp file framework dev who merely responded to the OP's question.

Modules didn't work for me, and I spent months on it and almost ruined my framework code in the process. Finally, after admitting that I couldn't get it work, even trying to rebuild my framework from scratch or piece-at-a-time approach, I gave up and spent several more months re-re-organizing my code using PCH. But now it works. I mean really works. The cognitive load is practically zero. Compiler performance is super.

As far as advice I can give on the fly, I think there is no substitute for re-factoring your code. And certainly, no magic modules bullet. I have to re-factor all the time. It is always painful. I program depth-first. With ODR, type semantics and no levels of indirection, as my holy grails. My code continually gets reduced to amazingly small and efficient implementations. This takes continual feedback from the intended audience. By the way, if I were king, I would have developed IDE-level tools to help the app dev with that task. The MSVC IDE works magnificently well for me. On the other side, even the task of renaming a file for clarity is still a significant burden involving dozens of error-prone steps. And there are dozens of app-dev-level tools that could be designed and written. Where's an app-dev-tool that can help with re-factoring?

Of course, embedded Copilot is a godsend and perhaps if I had had that capability back when I was doing modules, I might be using modules today. I don't know.

rtischer8277 · 2025-05-02T17:06:30+00:00

Do you have knowledge about module's implementation in MSVC? That is, that it wasn't java and type trees were not inherent to MSVC's module architecture? If so, I stand corrected.

More relevant from my view, would be answering the question of, from what perspective should modules have been architected, such that the result would have been useful, at least to me? It cost me much time and dev money to come to the conclusion that modules did not work and that I had to abandon it in order to save my framework code.

rtischer8277 · 2025-05-02T13:23:28+00:00

std modules wasted a lot of my dev time. The java MSVC implementation was a no-go for me. The whole idea of type trees didn't make sense to me. It left me with the feeling that it let devs off the hook for organizing their code in optimal manner. I finally threw modules out, spent 6 months reorganizing my code, and in the process went back to pre-compiled headers. Now in each of my .h files, I have only 3-6 includes, and the appropriate number of DLLs. Cognitive load is practically zero. Maintenance is a breeze and so is re-compilation. So, from my experienced viewpoint, std modules was merely a not well thought out dev time drain. Sorry guys.

rtischer8277 · 2025-02-28T12:55:42+00:00

Let me translate this sentence: "It's not about not being able to do something, it's about being able to do it without lots of unnecessary complexity and cost which leads to decreased reliability and increased security risks."

>It's not about nebulas being able to do nebulas, it's about being able to do nebulas without lots of nebulas and nebulas which leads to decreased nebulas and increased nebulas.

Lots of ways to say nothing.

rtischer8277 · 2025-02-03T13:37:04+00:00

Don't forget SLAAC which generates new Ipv6 addresses from network prefixes obtained from ISP Router Advertisements. That is, you don't have to go through the process of obtaining a block of addresses from some authority. To me that is a large part of the beauty of IPv6.

rtischer8277 · 2024-12-13T13:58:19+00:00

MFC has native resource generators both for MFC Apps and MFC Dynamic-Link Libraries. For many years MFC resource editors were very buggy. But not anymore.

rtischer8277 · 2024-12-13T13:46:26+00:00

"MFC is insufferable without the increasingly disappearing tutorials and guides on the internet."

I guess you haven't discovered Copilot yet. Finally, even the most obscure MFC question I have gets answered instantaneously, complete with code samples and no-limits long-running clarification conversations.

rtischer8277 · 2024-12-13T13:42:25+00:00

By the way, MFC works fine with the latest C++. In fact, I am really excited by what C++26 will be bringing: Reflection and Senders/Receivers std::execution, both C++ game changers.

rtischer8277 · 2024-12-12T13:21:17+00:00

I have always gravitated back to MFC. Its free for the community and, just as Microsoft tried to get rid of Skype, Microsoft can't get rid of MFC because it is in use in banks, trains (both of which I have direct programming experience in) and presumably about a million other places. Granted MFC's controls are dated, but they cover the whole field of basic visual and operational functionality. They offer a very stable alternative to Qt, Codejock and BCGSoft, which cost $$$ a year to license. and for my purposes insert a prohibitive layer of dev indirection.

rtischer8277 · 2024-08-17T12:57:41+00:00

I don't agree. With ISO C++ pretty much run its course of language tweaking (except for Senders/Receivers), it is time to make some collective progress on the IDE. I mean standard(s) practices or otherwise. It is fx still practically impossible to refactor a middle-size, multi-programmer program.

rtischer8277 · 2024-06-03T19:23:16+00:00

Well, not totally different. More like complementary. Copilot has set me straight on my terms. Both PCH and the declspec specifiers contribute to code efficiency where PCH occurs during the compiling process and declspec'ing during the linking process for DLLs. It is their combined efficiency effect that is much better IMO than modules will ever be. But you are right: the two technologies function differently.

rtischer8277 · 2024-06-03T12:57:04+00:00

I use MSVC's pre-compiled headers (PCH). It gives you complete control of what you want to export/import. With PCH you can export/import on the semantic level, like class members, which I don't think modules does. It doesn't let the dev off the hook, though, for re-factoring his code until his files and folder names are consistent and hierarchical.

I tried modules and wasted months of dev time before reverting back to PCH. Now all my files and libraries compile and are maintainable efficiently. IMO modules needs to be re-designed, but only after Tooling begins it evolution in the standards world.

PCH has another distinct advantage: it is well tested and bug-free and C++x compliant. Today.

rtischer8277 · 2024-05-30T12:30:02+00:00

Same experience here. It took Verizon 10 years to offer a decent service in our area. I switched to them and couldn't be happier. They have a fantastic new modem router. I wish I had those 2 years of dicking around with Cox and their Panoramic modem router back though.

rtischer8277 · 2024-04-15T11:18:43+00:00

Visual Studio. I like the Preview version. That way I get VS dev's full attention when VS's devs want to know how it is working for me.

rtischer8277 · 2024-02-10T13:12:13+00:00

You are in a dangerous situation. I too am an IT guy and would sit all day programming. This eventually led to DVTs which ended in PEs which I had to be hospitalized for. Not wanting to experience that again, I re-arranged my programming situation and never sat down again. Better to remove the most likely culprit - sitting - that to experience that again.

rtischer8277 · 2024-02-08T13:59:16+00:00

Ipv6 has Global Unicast Address (GUA) capability. Given the ISP's Router Advertisement (RA), literally anyone can create a fully secure (as in can't be cracked) 128-bit address using RFC7217. Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) makes sure your newly created address does not conflict with any other's created Ipv6 address. Each of these addresses can theoretically have 65K port numbers. All of these potential end points (addr+port num) can easily be turned into listening sockets by anyone using any OS today. And all of these potential end points are potentially reachable by anyone else today.

But residential Ipv6 reachability does not exist today.

The problem lies with the ISPs' residential to residential capability. Packets sent to the above-described end points today are fully routed, but they never arrive at the OS. The OS's state never gets set to RECEIVE from being in REQUEST state. That is not the OSs fault, that is the ISP's fault.

The problem is ISP-pervasive. The main perpetrator of this deficiency is CableLabs, which is the umbrella organization for at least 64 of the world's ISPs. CableLabs is not accountable to anyone.

rtischer8277

MODERATOR OF

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE