Visual C++ Book
in [MFC]
|
Prev: DoModal Broken in Debug Mode in VS2005 SP1
Next: Default beep when clicking in list control on Vista
From: Shahoo on 30 Mar 2007 12:32 Hello, As I have mentioned in some my other posts I am a beginner to MFC and VC++. Currently I am studing the book "Teach yourself Visual C++.NET in 21 Days" from Sams and I am finishing it. Can anyone suggest any other books, sites or tutorials to continue after that book? Thanks in advancce.
From: David Ching on 30 Mar 2007 12:51 "Shahoo" <shahookamangar(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1175272351.170561.203760(a)d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > Hello, > As I have mentioned in some my other posts I am a beginner to MFC and > VC++. > Currently I am studing the book "Teach yourself Visual C++.NET in 21 > Days" from > Sams and I am finishing it. Can anyone suggest any other books, sites > or tutorials > to continue after that book? > Thanks in advancce. > Ivor Horton's Beginning Visual C++ 2005 offers excellent introductions to both MFC and WinForms (using C++/CLI). -- David
From: ajkalra on 30 Mar 2007 22:17 On Mar 30, 11:32 am, "Shahoo" <shahookaman...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > As I have mentioned in some my other posts I am a beginner to MFC and > VC++. > Currently I am studing the book "Teach yourself Visual C++.NET in 21 > Days" from > Sams and I am finishing it. Can anyone suggest any other books, sites > or tutorials > to continue after that book? > Thanks in advancce. Jeff Prosise's MFC book(2nd edition) is dated(VC6) but is very valid. Its all about MFC and obviously has nothing about .Net in it. --- Ajay
From: MrAsm on 31 Mar 2007 11:43 On 30 Mar 2007 19:17:45 -0700, ajkalra(a)gmail.com wrote: >Jeff Prosise's MFC book(2nd edition) is dated(VC6) but is very valid. >Its all about MFC and obviously has nothing about .Net in it. I do like Jeff's MFC book very much. It's very very clear: I learned MFC reading this great book (and coding, too). For the .NET part, it's just my humble opinion, but I would not invest time in learning C++ extensions for .NET. If I want to do .NET programming, I would do it in C# (which IMHO is much better suited for this kind of task.) MrAsm
From: David Ching on 31 Mar 2007 12:10
"MrAsm" <mrasm(a)usa.com> wrote in message news:740t03dg92olvj21lfcvur5fpqacle1a1e(a)4ax.com... > For the .NET part, it's just my humble opinion, but I would not invest > time in learning C++ extensions for .NET. If I want to do .NET > programming, I would do it in C# (which IMHO is much better suited for > this kind of task.) > As I've said before, it isn't as easy as people think to create your first WinForms app in C#. There is enough new that you don't need to be tripping over the eccentricities of C# (compared to C++) along with everything else. To a C++ programmer, C++/CLI is intuitive to read and write, with no gotchas. Just replace "new" with "gcnew" and '^' with '*' and you're done. C# makes everything look like a value class even when it's clearly not. You don't need that. Having fiddled with my first real .NET program (a port of a home-grown spam killer app I wrote years ago in MFC) in C++/CLI, I think I've learned enough about WinForms and .NET to do my next one (for commercial deployment) in C#. But really, C++/CLI is the best way for experienced C++ people to get started with .NET. BTW, C# is in no way "better suited for this kind of task." C++/CLI has exactly the same capabilities as C#, and in fact more of them (e.g. better finalizer support, increased performance). The only reason I am migrating to C# is to be positioned to take advantage of WPF and LINQ which will not be usable from C++/CLI. That and the whole C# ecosystem, with the great refactoring tools, and the vast C# samples. -- David |