What to use now as VC++
 

I've been out of the programming loop for 2 years or so know and am a little lost at all of the C++ programming programs there are now. I need today's equivalent of Visual C++ 6.

What should I use Visual .Net ... or ... just what do I need :confused: :D .

Thanks... also... if NO-ONE around here do any xbox coding????!!!

I am... and I was hoping to ask some Q's.... maybe later or something...

Yes, Visual Studio .Net 2003 (or VS 2005 if you don't mind using betas) is the way to go. There is a common misconception that current Visual Studios only make .Net executables, and this is not the case. VS is still the best C++ solution for Windows, in my opinion. :)

Regards

If you're only looking to program in C++ (without .NET), a really good IDE to use is Bloodshed Dev-C++ . MUCH less bloated than VS and it's using mingw for its compiler

Check it out here:

I still use visual c++ 6.0
In my opinion, unless you need .NET (as md5 says) - there isn't any major reason to change. Especially as your obviously familiar with 6.0

More and more people, projects ... are moving, porting from VC++ 6.0 to VS .NET 2003. The IDE, intergrate debugger, compiler, language support ... of VS .NET is far better than VC++ 6. So, why we still insist on using VC++ 6.

What do you think of Borland C++ Builder? If your like RAD or pure C/C++ programming, this is another good choice.

I still use VC++ 6.0 but plan to move on VS .NET 2005 as soon as it becomes available in non beta form. The reason for that is expected new better debugging tools integrated in VS .NET 2005. Hint: Matt Pietrek is working on this.

Tom

I do use GCC and Cygwin often and also use Dev-Cpp on many occasions but for this project I can only use Mircosoft... Now is the .NET stuff like the 6.0 version but just a new version....?

The thing I'm trying to work on is compatible with Microsoft Visual C++ 6.0 and I wanna make sure that it will work with .NET as well.....

Also... is there any _real_ reason NOT to use the BETA 2005?

I still use visual c++ 6.0 ,and VS .NET 2003 too.
In my opinion, If you will not use Microsoft .NET frameworks (this is a virtual machine live a Java) VS .NET 2003 or Higher is more best IDE than VS 6. For Example the Class View is more certainly in C++ grammar, specially when using ATL.

I'd say go for Visual Studio .NET 2003 (or even 2002, there isn't much difference). In my opinion, the environment is much better and the C++ compiler generates better code than VC6.

Ok... well after looking around some more I have concluded that the Studio .NET 2003 will suit me best esp. since I will be using it with the XDK ;).

Thanks guys... also quick question to go along with this though.... does anyone know any reason to use Mingw32 compiler over Cygwin (or viceversa)

thanks1

I beg to differ on this... The IDE wasn't much changed, I agree, but the C++ compiler had many notable changes. So for the topic at hand, I recommend VS.Net 2003 highly over 2002...

I can second this ...
... if you want to restart with either 2002 or 2003, choose the 2003 version

Kerstin

There are some compiler bugs not fixed in VS.2003, use Intel CPP compiler instead.

Hm i recently noticed sth strange. The compiler seems to have problems with calculations with return values from functions within function arguments. E.g.
The call in main is not translated correctly so the value given to AnotherFunc is wrong...
Hm well yes but you still need a linker and an IDE is quite useful, too.
So the best is to use MSVC++ 7.1 (2003) + Intel C++ Compiler 8.1 (as it can be integrated into MSVC++).
Just noticed that executables created by Intel C++ Compiler are generally bigger than those ones created with cl (M$' compiler).
But therefore it provides more otimization features (e.g. Parallelization, PGO, ...) as well as support for latest technology such as SSE3 aso...
Anyways I can remember that M$ announced support for PGO in MSVS 2005.

I don't want to create a new Thread, as my questio is very similar with this one.
I was also avay from programming for a long time... but now come back:)
Can you plese recomend what i can use to compile for AMD 64 under windows xp 64 beta?

A lot of thanks

Intel CPP 8.1 is a good choise ->
http://www.intel.com/software/products/compilers/cwin/relnotes.pdf

Recent VS2005 betas compile for x86-64 fairly well, but the most established compiler in this area is gcc.

To vladlp:
If you want to compile for 64-bit windows xp. The best compiler is VS2005 which support compile 64-bit project directly.
VS6 and VS.net can be used also. But you should install 64-bit platform sdk and modify the project setting manual.

Thanks for answer, than monday start looking for and dowload VS .NET 2005 beta
PS: Wich release of VS .NET 2005 is last one?

Latest VS2005 beta is VS2005 December CTP.

The latest that is being publicly distributed that I know of is VS2005 November CTP, which you can get from Winbeta. If you find where to get the December CTP, please let me know! :D

Regards

Am I the only one who hates .NET, and does not want to code .NET-apps???

It is slow, decompilable and needs a really big framework to be installed! If I want to code such crappy-applications, I can code in Java as well, as it has the same nasty features.

Don't you see all the advantages of lightweight and fast native Win32-code, produced by VC++???

I would even code in Visual Basic with all its nasty runtime-files, before creating .NET-apps!

Big_or_what, is that a reply to anyone inparticular? Who has said anything about coding in .Net (the framework)? We have only been talking about VS .Net and 2005 (the IDEs), which are capable of producing non-.Net, pure native code. No one here has even mentioned anything other than C++... What caused this little rant?

As for hating .Net the framework, I think you are quite naive in believing that it is either slow or (always) decompilable. I can only assume you have formed an opinion of the product without ever having tried it. No offense, but this only makes you look foolish in my opinion.

Regards

Some people still confuses about the VS .NET. They are thinking that using VS .NET is only for writting building .NET apps only, same as me when VS .NET 2002 released.
SatyricOn, don't need to angry, just a personal opinion of Big_or_What !!!
Regards,

Not A Big Fan of .NET
 

I believe VS.NET 200x would and will be upgraded as time passes and will have more "inbuilt stuff"
But for me what works , is WHAT client wants, if he's willing to pay more
for .NET ( hey i love it) otherwise vc++ 6 is more than enough for me!

From the mouth of Stan Lippman himself (everyone does know who Stan Lippman is, right? Author of Essential C++, C++ Primer, etc):

"I have a beef with some folks out there. I have spent 3 years now within the Visual C++ team. We have a dozen exceptional compiler folks – it's too bad you don’t know them, because you would be very impressed with them – their knowledge, their passion. And yet 3 years of their work on our C++ compiler – in terms of performance, in terms of correctness, in terms of robustness – oh, and in terms of the language itself – is being dismissed by our rogue group of folks who, in an emotional protest against what they must see as an attack on C++, refuse to move from Visual C++ 6, which was fine when it was released, but isn't any longer fine. you shouldn't be using it. anymore. And they persist, and you can't talk to them, because either they are angry or they are really angry. But the bottom line is, we've poured our blood into the gosh-darn compiler. we have at least a hundred people working every day to make it better. no one else in the world cares about C++ more than we do. I know, that sounds so absurd. but that's the truth of the landscape right now. whatever Microsoft may have been in the past – and people always have stories about it. Did I tell you the one where the guy from Microsoft calls Bjarne up at home and tells him that if he doesn't make the language left recursive look ahead 1 they wouldn't go ahead with a c++ compiler. who would want to work for a company like that? I mean, you'd like to see them fail. So we all have a lot of bad feelings about Microsoft. But I think a lot of that is in the past. certainly, for me, this is a very creative and genuine place to work. I spent 1.5 working on the firebird sequence of fantasia and that was all I cared about work-wise. that is what I thought about all the time. well, the people here think about C++ all the time. it's so weird. Jeff Peill knows the language better than I do now. And these Visual 6 guys don't get it. We've poured our blood into these releases. You're just being stubborn. Compilers are works in progress. you don't want to keep using an old compiler. it's not safe. it's not good for the programmers or the business. Well, that's my beef with folks – or some folks. I really have no patience with them. I'm sorry if I've offended them."

In short, from the man behind the VC++ compiler, stop using VC++6! :D

See also:
hxxp://blogs.msdn.com/branbray/archive/2003/11/11/51012.aspx
hxxp://blogs.msdn.com/hsutter/archive/2003/11/17/53495.aspx

OK, if it also produces Win32-code and is stable - why not to use it?

I just thought Microsoft would have done the same bullshit like Borland: Their "great" Delphi 8 release just compiled .NET-executables!

Of course, Delphi 2005 (Delphi 9) compiles both native win32 and .Net. :)

Yes, Delphi 9 DOES so, because the programmers either noted themselves that compiling only .NET (like in Delphi 8) is bullshit, or got to know it by their customers.

Hello all,

Interesting comments here on two platfroms. Here are my two cents on above mater:

I've been a programer for 10 years now...The first serious programing was with Borland C++ Builder 1 (since i was c fan) this was the one owesome tool.(great IDE, RAD...1 exe deployment). I was thinking to go with Microsoft Visual but after some trying i Borland way more suitable.

Then I started to work in team development, and I had to switch to Borland Delphi. The switch was simple, same vendor, different language. I worked with Delphi until 8 release. We were thinking to upgrade but we found out that 8 release is actually improvement of 7 with NET. Sadly Borland did not have time to finish Win32 support, that is why it only produces .NET.

During this period I was working also with M$ Visual C++, and i still use it.

Sorry if this post is a long one, but my point here is that complier is just a tool. For example if you need to drill something there are like a toons of vendors who supply different tools for this: BOSH, HILTY...etc. The differene between them is a performance and of course the price. Same with programing. Clients does not care which tools you use - They are interested in only one thing - applications that are easy to use and helps them to do their job.

So, if you are thinking to get back to progaming it is better to use newer techology. The .NET C++ is better, but is it worth the upgrade? If you work with .net then Yes. If not, it depends on your financial freedom. If you're have money to invest, or your employer have the money then go for it.

As for the Delphi tool, i have not played with Delphi 2005 yet. I am working with ASP.NET (C#) and what can i say...just another tool that generates an income for my life.

Just my two cents...regards to all...ASmith

VC++ 6
 

I think if you don't need to involve yourself with .NET and Microsoft IL, then VC++ 6 is steal the best environment for every real programmers. ;)

Well, ASP.NET is maybe one of the few things, .NET is usefull for, so you don't have to use crappy php-stuff.

But for traditional Windows-programming, .NET is really shitty bullshit.

As a development enviroment there are better alternatives: Source Insight, Slickedit, Codewright
VS is good but its power comes from libraries/frameworks that come with :
MFC,.NET etc....

To vladlp:
If you want to compile for 64-bit windows xp. The best compiler is VS2005 which support compile 64-bit project directly.
VS6 and VS.net can be used also. But you should install 64-bit platform sdk and modify the project setting manual.

I faced this problem 1 month ago
The big problem is not the compiler itself but the libraries.
The first try was to use DDK (which is the only non beta stuff that containd AMD 64 bit compiler)
Since DDK focuses on drivers I got easily libraries problems and problems related of adapting projects to DDK building env.
Normally the AMD64 support should be delivered with Platform SDK
It seems there is a platform SDK (non public) beta that has AMD 64 support. Unfortunately I couldnt get it. Im still wondering why they dont realease a SDK that includes AMD64.
The latest VSNET 2005 has the compiler and the libraries for a lot of targets including AMD64. So I had to install a lot og Gigs only fot this AMD64.
It sucks but its the only way
But remember the best way is to get that platform SDK( I post the number later cuz I dont have it here) that has AMD64

Well, power of computers doubles about every 18 months, they say. But developers don't get faster at the same rate. So, I see creation of frameworks that increase effectiveness of developers as a good thing (even if these frameworks add some overhead to programs). You are probably aware that similar things had been said about C++ by C programmers. Why make religion out of programming? I think the most important criterion in most cases should be whether it's good for business.

As far as performance is concerned (at least, that of C#), take a look at Does C# Measure Up? (why isn't this link rendered as one?... suka)

Use Visual Studio Net.2003 (don't even think about Net.2002)
I have experience with C++ compiler and I can say that It is much better than in VC++ 6.0 , It doesn't produce faster code but C++ compiler can compile very advance C++ constructions like: partial class and function templates so it makes lifes easier. VS 6.0 often for templates generates Compiler Internal Error and it is terrible to findout what construction is not fully supported by
compiler.
Also you can find out usefull for you that you can switch compilation for Intel p4 and AMD with SIMD od 3dNow ext.
Net.2003 has some problems with bigger solutions contains more than 20/30 projects, sometimes some of the projects just disappear with all settings. so make bakup of the solution files.
Regards
bearek

lack of language support
 

Would be true if VC++6 could be used to compile C++ sources. Unfortunately it has such a terrible language support that I can't treat it a C++ compiler. For mainly C projects it is perfect.