VC++ 6.0 To .NET
in [Visual C]
|
Prev: Error LNK2028 unresolved token / LNK2019 Unrevolved external symbol
Next: IJolietDiscMaster->AddData returning STG_E_INVALIDFUNCTION
From: elwilj on 18 Sep 2007 17:40 On Sep 17, 2:55 pm, "Tom Serface" <tom.nos...(a)camaswood.com> wrote: > Aside from all the terminology advice given I'd just port directly to VC++ > 2005. Going from 2005 to 2008 will be a lot easier so I wouldn't wait. You > will likely find a few things to fix, but I've never taken more than a day > or so converting a project. If you want to really make it a .NET > application (I'm assuming you don't) then that would be a lot more work > especially if the application uses MFC. If the application works as a > native application I don't think you'll benefit from converting it to an > actual .NET application unless there is something specifically there that > you need. > > Tom > > <elw...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:1190047097.294281.50880(a)19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... > > > > > I'm new to the MS Visual Studio world. I've just inherited a project > > that was written entirely in VC++ 6.0. Should I make the move to VC+ > > +.NET and bybass VC++ 2005? Does the upgrade to .NET involve a great > > deal of code rewrites? What resources are out there to help with this > > migration? We are on Windows 2000 and XP machines ... must admit I'm > > a unix guy thru and thru but this app needs some work. Does anyone > > out there have any recommendations? > > > Thanks > > LJ- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - On Sep 17, 1:33 pm, "Giovanni Dicanio" <giovanni.dica...(a)invalid.it> wrote: > <elw...(a)gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggionews:1190047097.294281.50880(a)19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... > For example, as you can read from lots of comments here: > > http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2007/08/08/visual-c-futures.aspx > > the best IDE for C++ + MFC development is VC6. > You may find the following Wikipedia page to be interesting: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_C++ > > You can read there that, after Visual C++ 6, we had: > > - Visual C++ .NET 2002 (a.k.a. VC++7.0) > - Visual C++ .NET 2003 (a.k.a. VC++7.1) > - Visual C++ 2005 (a.k.a. VC++8.0) > > For example, as you can read from lots of comments here: > > http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2007/08/08/visual-c-futures.aspx > > the best IDE for C++ + MFC development is VC6. > Giovanni Wow! Thanks for your responses. I guess I was more confused than I thought. As it stands, I guess our app is not as far behind as I had imagined. I visited the blog and wikipedia sites listed above. very good info. From what I have read I won't really NEED to change VC++ versions at this time. My goal is to have the system rewritten in a year or two anyway. By then VC++ 8.0 should have all of the kinks out -- why does MS have to be so complicated? To be honest I was thinking of going the Java route <:o| Being that this is a heavy MFC utilized app, I'll see what the cost is for porting to VC++ 8.0. LJ
From: Giovanni Dicanio on 18 Sep 2007 18:13 <elwilj(a)gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio news:1190151630.995116.198090(a)57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com... >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_C++ >> http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2007/08/08/visual-c-futures.aspx >> >> the best IDE for C++ + MFC development is VC6. > >> Giovanni > Wow! Thanks for your responses. I guess I was more confused than I > thought. > I visited the blog and wikipedia sites listed above. very > good info. > By then VC++ 8.0 should have all of the kinks out If my understanding is correct, the real improvements to C++ and MFC development I think will come with Orcas+1, i.e. VC++ 8.0+1 = VC++9 if they continue with this naming schema. But there could be reasons to switch to VC++8 (a.k.a Visual Studio 2005) now, e.g.: - you need advanced features of C++, exspecially in the template area - you need to target Vista (I believe that Vista SDK is not compatible with VC6) - you want to mix C++ and .NET managed code, using C++/CLI (not available in VC6 - you should use COM in VC6, much more complex, as I wrote in my previous post) > -- why does MS have to be so complicated? I think that they made a mistake in the past to focus everything to .NET, a kind of "marketing hype", like it happened for Java. ..NET is a very cool and useful and "beautiful" technology, IMHO. In .NET there come important lessons from the past, about security, robustness, simplicity of developing code or building GUIs, etc. These are all great things. But there is room for native code, too (e.g. there are several big apps written in C++ and MFC that need to be mantained, and there are also performance reasons in some contexts such that native C/C++ is the way to go, not managed code). I believe that now Visual C++ team is again focused on making the next (Orcas+1) IDE a great platform for C++ native development, I believe they will be successful. > To be honest I was > thinking of going the Java route <:o| These are Microsoft newsgroups, and maybe I may be some biased (however, I do my best to be honest on technical analysis). But if you really need to invest your time in moving your code to a managed world, I would go for the .NET path, *not* for Java path. IIRC, recently Java has been put under GPL; I don't know if Sun will have control on Java anymore, I don't know if Java will become a chaotic thing with several different platforms and implementations with mutual incompatibilities... I would prefer much more .NET. Microsoft is producing a great technology in ..NET. And now it seems that also dynamic languages like Ruby or Python can target the .NET framework! However, porting a C++/MFC big app to .NET could cause a huge redesign of some parts, like the GUI. You should pay attention carefully before moving a big working system from C++/MFC to .NET, IMHO. Also consider that - IIRC - you can host MFC and ActiveX controls inside ..NET WinForms, so you could mix both the old C++/MFC code and the new .NET world. Giovanni
From: Tom Serface on 18 Sep 2007 19:08 I agree with Giovanni only, if you are just using MFC you may want to wait until the next version to upgrade since you already have most of what you need and probably a better environment for doing MFC programming. VS (starting with .NET) got a vastly redesigned interface that many C++ programmers have trouble adapting to. I don't find it a problem, but it is different and I miss ClassWizard. I still think it's worth updating, but going to the expense now when you don't really need to and having 2008 right around the corner seems to make sense. I would definitely go to 2008 when it comes out though. Tom <elwilj(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1190151630.995116.198090(a)57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com... > >> For example, as you can read from lots of comments here: >> >> http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2007/08/08/visual-c-futures.aspx >> >> the best IDE for C++ + MFC development is VC6. >> > > > You may find the following Wikipedia page to be interesting: >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_C++ >> >> You can read there that, after Visual C++ 6, we had: >> >> - Visual C++ .NET 2002 (a.k.a. VC++7.0) >> - Visual C++ .NET 2003 (a.k.a. VC++7.1) >> - Visual C++ 2005 (a.k.a. VC++8.0) >> > >> For example, as you can read from lots of comments here: >> >> http://blogs.msdn.com/somasegar/archive/2007/08/08/visual-c-futures.aspx >> >> the best IDE for C++ + MFC development is VC6. > >> Giovanni > > Wow! Thanks for your responses. I guess I was more confused than I > thought. As it stands, I guess our app is not as far behind as I had > imagined. I visited the blog and wikipedia sites listed above. very > good info. From what I have read I won't really NEED to change VC++ > versions at this time. My goal is to have the system rewritten in a > year or two anyway. By then VC++ 8.0 should have all of the kinks out > -- why does MS have to be so complicated? To be honest I was > thinking of going the Java route <:o| Being that this is a heavy MFC > utilized app, I'll see what the cost is for porting to VC++ 8.0. > LJ >
From: David Wilkinson on 18 Sep 2007 20:52 Giovanni Dicanio wrote: > If my understanding is correct, the real improvements to C++ and MFC > development I think will come with Orcas+1, i.e. VC++ 8.0+1 = VC++9 if they > continue with this naming schema. Giovanni: Your math is faulty: VS98: VC6 VS2002: VC7 VS2003: VC7.1 VS2005: VC8 Orcas: VC9 Orcas+1: VC10 -- David Wilkinson Visual C++ MVP
From: Tom Serface on 18 Sep 2007 23:07
Man it's hard to see how anyone can get those version number mixed up :o) Tom "David Wilkinson" <no-reply(a)effisols.com> wrote in message news:O8cDYdl%23HHA.4736(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Giovanni Dicanio wrote: >> If my understanding is correct, the real improvements to C++ and MFC >> development I think will come with Orcas+1, i.e. VC++ 8.0+1 = VC++9 if >> they continue with this naming schema. > > Giovanni: > > Your math is faulty: > > VS98: VC6 > VS2002: VC7 > VS2003: VC7.1 > VS2005: VC8 > Orcas: VC9 > Orcas+1: VC10 > > -- > David Wilkinson > Visual C++ MVP |