[pjmlp]

Yet VC++ offers much better tooling, including pre-compiled headers, incremental compilation and linking, experimental support for modules, C++ friendly OS APIs, and a package manager actually written in C++.

[AWildC182]

And a project config system that will break everything at the slightest provocation! Seriously, setting up even moderately complicated multi-project solutions usually results in days lost to figuring out why x library isn't linking with y project. The editor is great, the build system is somehow worse than make/cmake.

[vnorilo]

Nowadays MSVC has a built-in cmake integration (a bit like vscode). You can open a folder with CMakeLists.txt and it will mostly work.

[AWildC182]

Yes, if you can justify using cmake on Windows. Most customers want an MSVC project though it seems.

[ajuc]

And then you want to use that library that isn't a msvc project.

Or, God forbid, you want to use clang or gcc. Or intel's whatever.

[pjmlp]

Intel is compatible with MSVC++, using binary libraries is quite common on the PC world since MS-DOS days.

Plus there are DLLs and COM libraries as well.