Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2018 March 25

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Computing desk
< March 24 << Feb | March | Apr >> March 26 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


March 25

[edit]

Microsoft Windows Calculator Development

[edit]

Which programming language or software Microsoft used to develop its Windows Calculator? For development of apps, people use java or any other languages. For development of Windows, Microsoft might have used c# or any other languages. I developed a basic calculator using MATLAB. I just want to know how did Microsoft developed its calculator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.139.241.85 (talk) 13:11, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Old calculator (pre Windows 8) was developed in C/C++. New one was developed within Universal Windows Platform though I do know details. Ruslik_Zero 20:17, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hence, developing softwares using GUI features of Universal Windows Platform or MATLAB is much easier than compared to using any programming language to develop. Correct me, if I am wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.139.241.85 (talk) 07:28, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Developing an application using Universal Windows Platform is done using a programming language, such as C++ or C#. UWP does not replace the use of a programming language. Whether it's easier than using other tools depends somewhat on the experience of the programmer. For example, I'm very familiar with Microsoft Foundation Class Library but have never used UWP, so I would probably find it easier to develop a calculator using MFC. My understanding is the main advantage of UWP is to facilitate creation of cross-platform applications, not necessarily to simplify creating an application for a single platform. CodeTalker (talk) 18:33, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]