|
I'm still using Visual Studio 6.0 for both Visual FoxPro and Visual Basic development. Some time ago did some Visual C++ development when I start mastering the language, but I realized MFC is a hell. So I don't understand what is so exciting about MFC... which is really exciting about .NET for me is C#. Not to say a don`t like C++.
cl
|
|
|
|
|
HI all,
THis is not about the poll, but....
Can we make MFC apps with VC7 that will work with Win98 ? When I created an app, Win98 was complaining about MFC7.dll not available.
Or in otherwords, how can we make apps depended on MFC42.dll using VC7 or VS2003?
TIA,
Hari
Hari Krishnan
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
you will have to redistribute the MFC7.dll with your application !
Btw : Please take care that all older Windows versions ( < ME) does not have a full-blown unicode stack available, so you will have to compile your application with MBCS support if you would like to use it on Win9x AND NT/2000/XP (unicode will only works on this platforms)...
CU
andi
|
|
|
|
|
I have been using Visual Studio 6.0 from day one of my C++ development and have not changed. Besides the interface changes I cannot seem to fit the IDE upgrade into my budget 
As for C#, I am using SharpDev which I will never turn back from .. As I am throughly satisfied.
C++ - Pure, Simple, Makes Sense.
C# - Microsoft's idea of Pure and Simple
|
|
|
|
|
I`m planning to upgrade to .net 2003 from VC6. What do you think? Is it good / bad? Why? Thanks
<italic>Work hard and a bit of luck is the key to success. 
|
|
|
|
|
Just be careful - note you are "skipping" a version by going directly from 6 to 2003. (skipping the original VS.NET, which is 2002.) The only thing that means is that some things were deprecated in 2002, and no longer supported in 2003. So you may get some compilation problems.
There should be few of those, though, if any.
The IDE is vastly different from 6.0, too. It's not bad, but it takes some getting used to.
An expert is somebody who learns more and more about less and less, until he knows absolutely everything about nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
At first: try it and AFTER that decide you work with 2003.
I had to do it, but it wasnt my decision.
If you like the VC6 Wizard and the browse (class & function) stick to VC6!!!
The 2003 faetures I suppose as "sh*t" made from really unexperienced programmers which were forced to get the release.
Its also slow in the GUI and buildings.
"Nice try but where is THE new version?"
Try this @ home. (B&B)
|
|
|
|
|
I stepped from VC6 to VS.NET 2002, and I didn't had much problems.
The step from VS.NET 2002 to 2003 had much more impact on my code because of thetypename keyword I was forced to use, and the difference of handling enum's.
But in my eyes it was absolutly OK and I do not want to go back to VC6.
I have to work on some old projects with VC6 and I hate it.
Yes the IDE is different, but everyone will hate IDE changes!
But due to the fact that I have now one IDE for every language I can choose the advantage is great...
Just my 2 cents
|
|
|
|
|
Is that means that I should go with the .net 2002?
<italic>Work hard and a bit of luck is the key to success.
|
|
|
|
|
Before buying the upgrade, I would suggest trying out an alternative
The point is, there are now many freeware alternatives on the net, which do almost as much as visual studios .NET
I use a program called sharp develop, which you can download at http://www.sharpdevelop.com/OpenSource/SD/Download/
Before installing it, however, you have to install the .NET framework, which you find at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=262d25e3-f589-4842-8157-034d1e7cf3a3
After installing, you can make and compile VB.NET apps, C#.NET apps and C++.NET apps. It also has a visual interface.
Hope it's useful.
The best things in life are for free 
|
|
|
|
|
Do it. You're likely to have a few issues (they finally got rid of supporting #include<xxx.h> headers for example) but nothing insurmountable. And, at least for me, the improved compiler is worth the pain.
Unless you can wait for VS2005.
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
I despiratly want to try .NET 2005 for my personal purpose. How will i get it. I am not in a state to purchase that fulll version.
**************************
S r e e j i t h N a i r
**************************
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can download the beta version of 2005 Express compilers for free. They don't have all the tools and libraries the non-free versions have (they don't have MFC), but it's good enough for basic testing and playing with the .NET framework.
|
|
|
|
|
hey u can download it from the website..yep it ll nt have full functionality but u can look forward in the direction and start playing with the newer version.......
one more idea u can also ask from someone who has purchased copy...got it?
|
|
|
|
|
Moving from VC6 to 2003 was my biggest ever coding mistake. 30% reduction in productivity. Now I'm switching back whenever I can.
<rant>
I switched because of the improved standards compliance. But it comes at a horrible price. I hate the IDE, just like everyone else,
but that's not the only problem.
* The generated code also seems inferior - executables are much bigger. I only ever optimise for size, with spot optimisations for speed only where required.
* They did some completely bizarre things with some of the old libraries. I have some old DAO code. I just cannot believe that they deprecated DAO and simultaneously upgraded it!! The upgraded DAO is really slow, and needs different drivers. I hate having to make small changes to old code that I intend to completely replace.
|
|
|
|
|
I have been thinking of moving from V6 to .Net. I knew
nothing of all the 200x's. I thought it simply V7. This
poll is an eye opener. Complaints! And little praise.
And I am two years into a project that I might not be able
to carry forward. I think I'll keep my 100 bucks in my
pocket.
WedgeSoft
|
|
|
|
|
 ;);)
|
|
|
|
|
|
>I hate the IDE, just like everyone else,
I love the IDE. My productivity increased massively once I spent a few weekends learning all the nuances of the VS.NET 2k3 IDE.. Sure, it has some issues, but I couldn't go back to VC 6 now.
Granted.. after a short period of using VS.NET 2k3 with C++ I moved to C# dev... so I can't go back anyway. 
Regards,
Brian Dela
http://www.briandela.com IE 6 required.
http://www.briandela.com/pictures Now with a pictures section
http://www.briandela.com/rss/newsrss.xml RSS Feed
|
|
|
|
|
Can't say I've had anything like your experience.
I've really enjoyed the switch to VS2003. IMHO the IDE is better - you can even make it damn similar to VC6 if you really have to. I haven't watched executable size too closely, you may be right in claiming that code size may increase, but mine certainly hasn't increased dramatically.
However, the clincher for me is, as you mentioned, the standards compliance. There's no way I'll be using VC6 again given that the compiler is so horrendously poor (compared to modern compilers, it was good in its day). The VS2003 compiler catches more errors, allows better coding techniques and let's me use the boost libraries. Nuh-uh, no way I'm going back!
I typically recommend everyone upgrade from VC6 to VS2003.
Cheers,
Matt
|
|
|
|
|
OK -- First I read all this stuff thats negative.
Now a few days later I read a bunch of positives.
And toss is questions about a 2005. And you
recommend 2003. CONFUSION!
I posted earlier I would just stick with V6 and
save my 100 bucks. (I don't know what 200x the
version a CompUSA I saw is.)
Should I just wait for 2005? What about the "better
compiler"? Is it really all that much better than
V6? (I was under the impression that V6 was a
very good compiler.)
The interface I can adjust to. (I moved from
UNIX and emacs and plain C to VC6 and their IDE --
I can move to any new interface  .) But I do have
a lot of MFC code (and some COM) that I will have
to port.
COM is another question... Is 2003 (or 2005) better
(easier) with COM? (I know I don't want to
learn C#!!!)
WedgeSoft
|
|
|
|
|
By saying that VS2003 has a better compiler I mean standard conforming with improved error and warning messages. Performance-wise VC6 is pretty good - it produces executables that are, generally, relatively quick and small. And, in that regard, comparable to executables produced by VS2003.
But if you want to use modern C++ techniques (particularly those involving templates) it's quite difficult, if not impossible in VC6. And if you want to use modern C++ libraries (boost and loki are two that spring to mind) you simply can't use VC6.
VS2005 will not give you any noticable advantages (over VS2003) to developing in C++ unless you're using C++/CLI (ie .NET stuff). If you are considering using C++/CLI in the future then definitely wait as the syntax has changed between version 2003 and 2005 and the latters is far superior.
I believe COM support is much of a muchness between all the versions.
I guess it depends what you want. If your developers (is it just you?) are happy using older-style C++ techniques & libraries then stick with VC6. (If you need to ask "what are modern techniques/libraries" then you can safely assume that you can stick with VC6)
If your developers are the type that would like to progress and take advantage of new coding techniques so they can take their C++ skills to the next level then I'd suggest VS2003.
If you're seriously considering moving to C++/CLI and .NET I'd wait for VS2005.
Personally, I tend to develop more generically these days with a relatively high usage of templated code. I'd hate to have to use VC6 again.
Hope that helps more than hinders!!
Cheers,
Matt
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you! Very helpful.
Just me. Stuck in my old ways
I know what templates are, I don't need them.
I assume CLI is Command Line Interpreter. I
don't need that either. I can't afford to buy
"modern libraries". Guess -- when I am forced
to upgrade, then I will. Your email
re-enforced that it is best I stay at V6
(for now).
WedgeSoft
|
|
|
|
|
OK, sounds like the right decision for you.
However, I've got to admit that I didn't think that I 'needed' templates all that long ago. Now I look to solve problems generically and I often use templates. Try not to dismiss their use as they are an extremely powerful tool.
And the boost (and loki) libraries are free, check them out!
Cheers,
Matt
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
