 |
|
 |
So, visiual editor is expected in this release. Is it only for Managed C++ or also for MFC ????
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Only for managed C++, IMHO because it's the same (or based on) form designer used with C#, VB .NET, J# etc.
As there are no properties with MFC (standard C++, after all without extensions) a designer would be a rather difficult task, producing awkward code.
Cheers
Martin
"Situation normal - all fu***d up"
Illuminatus!
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Hi Guys
I have a suggestion for .NET , since Microsoft is planning a new release , but will the guys at MS read this comment.
My suggestion is regarding "Resourse Symbols" form , there is a Listbox showing all the resource ID's but if you want to sort the listing in either name (default) of ID no. that's not possible , will Microsoft change the Listbox to a sortable List Control, the same facility which was missing (sort) in Visual Studio 6 has been introduced in .NET, or is this a useless suggestion.
BTW how does one get View->Classwizard in .NET previously available in VS6, i had somehow got it in .NET once by chance.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
There's another problem with that "Resourse Symbols" list control in VS6. If the name of the control is very long it get's cut. So if you have 2 controls that have similar ID's (first 21 characters are same) then you can't distinguish one from the other.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Admitantly for people that want to write a .NET application this is great, but for plain ordinary GUI development, I see this as a step backwards. MFC is being discontinued (meaning no new features) and in it's place for c++ developers is .Net forms, which GUI-wise is only a subset of MFC (lots of thing that are available in MFC, like doc-view architecture are not available). MFC held great potential until VC 4.2 which was the last release that really added any significant new features. After that MS seamed to loose interest in adding new GUI classes, or extending the existing ones and in my opinion there remains a huge amount of improvement needed in this area.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
The problem with the MFC is MS had no control over it. .NET introduces a radical change on that matter. Nobody knows what we developers are going to be forced to do (pay) in the future to be able to run a .NET app on someone else machine.
Back to real work : D-16.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Anonymous wrote:
MFC is being discontinued (meaning no new features)
Well, at least I got CDHTMLDialog, which I loved to use
Philip Patrick
Web-site: www.stpworks.com
"Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
I agree. But MS really stuck with the idea that all software
no matter what must be 'managed'...
When this happen, turn to third party?
Stephan
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Is it true that Microsoft is releasing a new version of Visual Studio in such a short time , can't beleive it. Microsoft last released Visual Studio 6 sometime in the 1st quarter of 1998 (am i right) , and then nearly 5 years later released Visual Studio.Net, is Microsoft using "Updates to VC++" as an excuse to cover-up for a rather shoddy product (.NET), Sample the following
I start installing .NET , after 1 hr 15 mins and 60% completion the system re-boots, after re-booting i try to install again , it knows that an earlier installation was un-successful and cleans up the previously installed files, Install proceeds , buts this time around it re-boots after 50 mins , so what do i do , re-install again or throw .NET in the dustbin or buy a new machine, A friend had once told me , In Windows when nothing else works try "Safe Mode" , so i start in "Safe Mode" BUT in "Safe Mode" in Windows 2000 you can only use Low-Resolution screen , which means that if i start installation i will not be able to see the "Cancel" and "Contine or Next" buttons , even if i shift the Start-Bar to the right from the bottom, but any way by trial and error method , using the tab key and a little bit of judgement i manage to overcome this problem of installation.
And now regarding the Help System , if i search for a keyword which return 500 search results , if i try to hurriedly scroll through the results , there is a 50-50 chance that either the Help System will crash with and error about some RPC Server (don't remember the exact message) or the system might just re-boot (there is no Blue-Screen of Death in Windows 2000).
Visual Studio.NET frequently re-boots when in use.
Is it better with Win-XP , no there are similar problems , except you can start Win-XP in Safe-Mode with High-Resolution. Re-boots are still there to trouble you.
My System configuration is P-III 700 , 256 MB RAM and 8 GB of Free Space at Installation time.
BTW : I have stopped using Visual Studio.NET and prefer the Windows 98/ Visual Studio 6 combination for my development activity because of stability , a better looking GUI then Windows 2000
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
If you needed a friend to tell you about safe mode, and do not realse that it ALWAYS means low resolution, you must be new to Windows. The fact is that some installations of Windows get in a bad way and it seems yours is one. Plenty of people install VS.NEt without hassle. I've installed it four times and had trouble only the first, and that WAS a battered system.
Barretto VN wrote:
And now regarding the Help System , if i search for a keyword which return 500 search results , if i try to hurriedly scroll through the results , there is a 50-50 chance that either the Help System will crash with and error about some RPC Server (don't remember the exact message) or the system might just re-boot (there is no Blue-Screen of Death in Windows 2000).
Man, your computer is SCREWED. Reinstall Windows NOW. What did you DO to it ?
Barretto VN wrote:
except you can start Win-ME in Safe-Mode with High-Resolution.
Can you really ? Never seen that on any other windows, but then I never used ME ( it is crapola ). I stand corrected on that front. I guarentee you can't with W98, and I don't think XP can either. I thought .NET would not work with ME though ? I thought you needed an NT OS.
Barretto VN wrote:
BTW : I have stopped using Visual Studio.NET and prefer the Windows 98/ Visual Studio 6 combination for my development activity because of stability , a better looking GUI then Windows 2000
The GUI takes some getting used to, but seeing as you had no trouble with .NET in ME either, isn't it obvious that your W2000 install is stuffed, not .NET ?
Christian
No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002
Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002
During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Christian Graus wrote:
Man, your computer is SCREWED. Reinstall Windows NOW. What did you DO to it ?
I have been using Windows 2000 with Visual Studio 6 for the past , it also has Visual Studio .NET but i do not have any problems with VS6 , Why ??? , do you still think that Windows is SCREWED up
Christian Graus wrote:
Can you really ? Never seen that on any other windows, but then I never used ME ( it is crapola ). I stand corrected on that front. I guarentee you can't with W98, and I don't think XP can either. I thought .NET would not work with ME though ? I thought you needed an NT OS.
If you have not used ME then why are you making comments , use it and the talk like an expert
Yes you can use ME in High Resolution in Safe Mode , choose "Select VGA Mode" at startup and then you can change the screen resolution by left clicking on the desktop and selecting properties.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Barretto VN wrote:
do you still think that Windows is SCREWED up
Yes, I still think your W2000 install had problems. If it was .NET, everyone would have these problems, and as I said, I only did once in four installs, on a W2000 install that was flaky.
Barretto VN wrote:
If you have not used ME then why are you making comments , use it and the talk like an expert
Sorry, I used it briefly, it is crap and so I uninstalled it and did not buy it.
Christian
No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002
Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002
During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Sorry, Sorry , Sorry
Its Windows XP not ME (too many names create confusion)
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Ah... I knew that XP did that, in fact XP doesn't do 640x480 at all ( the res that earlier windows forced you to in safe mode ). XP is actually a better OS for .NET anyhow, for a number of reasons, although I didn't like it enough to buy it, so I'm sticking with W2000.
I found I hated .NET at first ( and the install I had that went sour was my first, which did not help ), but I really like it now. I'd encourage you to give it another go. Let's face it, you'll end up using it one day.....
Christian
No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002
Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002
During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
A good advice : copy the DVD content to your hard drive, and install from there. 30 minutes instead of 1H30.
That said, if you have VC6 code, I highly recommend to have both VC6 and VC7 installed, because from my personal experience you are going to have a VERY HARD time getting your code compiled in VC7. (MFC7/ATL have some of their APIs changed).
Back to real work : D-16.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
I'll comment on the first because of the ample replies on the rest. You are right in the assumption that they are useing the upgrade to VC++ to warrent a new version but acctually this is not totally their fault. The reason that they are doing this is because alot of companies have asked that when they release service packs they only fix the problems with the software and not add any funtionality (I think this is because some sp's will fix somthing and introuce somthing that breaks ) But in defense for this the upgrade is ony $30 so really that is pretty much the same as getting an update cd (ok not really but close)
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
I think the fact that a new version is coming out so soon is an admission that the previous version was a flop, especially for C++/MFC developers.
I can see no reason for upgrading at this stage.
The 'improvements' in version 2003 seem to be mainly patching bugs and some rather esoteric additions to template processing.
I would much rather have seen MS complete VS 6 first before they embarked on any new ventures.
I am not too sure that .NET will be a success despite MS's attempts to force everyone onto it.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
I do not think that the template additions are esoteric.
they are fundamental for doing a really flexible and efficient code.
See Blitz++ for exemple.
O.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Any idea of the impact of the newer MSFT compiler on the Intel Compiler for VS product line?
I'd like to be able to use these newer features with the Intel compiler....
Comments?
Thanks
Karl
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
I'd like to know what happens when you try to run AMD/Intel complied code on the wrong type of processor.
Maybe if you use this feature you need to compile for all targets and have an application loader stub which runs the appropiate exe depending on processor type.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Would like to suggest Everett:
- Make WTL a standard library like MFC.
- Truely upgrade MFC, split OLE and UI code to make MFC leaner. Or upgrade WTL/ATL to take over MFC.
- More workable and reasonable native C/C++ samples like Nile.com 2! Don't put simple sample just to demonstrate an API.
*** Manage code is for kids, death of true software engineer start with .NET ***
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
*** Manage code is for kids, death of true software engineer start with .NET ***
C++ is for wimps. Long live assembler
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Anonymous wrote:
C++ is for wimps. Long live assembler
Assembler! Pah!
Weakling - I only program in hex
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
hex!Pah!
Weakling - I only program with 0,1
|
|
|
|
 |