Visual Studio.Net 2003 or Visual Studio 6.0?
Author
Is there any benefit in using Visual Studio.Net 2003 over Visual Studio 6.0 for game programming or C++ programming?
I have notice that there are no wizards for making a direct-x app like the doc states for Visual Studio 6.0.
Are missing features and problems common when using Visual Studio.Net 2003 or is it something I have done or not done.
I would like to know of your experiences between the two if possible. Cheers!
Ive never used VS.Net but ive been using VS6 for over a year now and its doing fine =)
Also, Visual Assist for VC++ 6 is a very good thing to have, do a search for it on google.
Also, Visual Assist for VC++ 6 is a very good thing to have, do a search for it on google.
.NET is more standards-compliant. It has a much better optimizing compiler. It has a more polished IDE. It is better integrated with source code control systems. It has a better STL. In short, it is teh r0x0r. I would never go back to 6.0.
I''m not sure if there are directX wizards in .NET.... I assume there are. But, really, the wizard does 0.01% of the work of making a game engine.... it really doesn''t matter whether it has one or not.
How appropriate. You fight like a cow.
I''m not sure if there are directX wizards in .NET.... I assume there are. But, really, the wizard does 0.01% of the work of making a game engine.... it really doesn''t matter whether it has one or not.
How appropriate. You fight like a cow.
Check out the free online demo of VS.Net. If you like it, go for it. I''ve been using VS6 pretty much since it came out, and I really love it -- but after seeing .Net, and looking at some of the new features, I''m hounding Finance for the cash to upgrade 
Author
Cheers, that''s the reassurance for VS.Net I wanted. I never used VS 6.0 much as I upgraded pretty quick to VS.Net. I asked because 99% of what I read is for VS 6.0 and it seems more hassle with VS.Net settings.
The reason I wanted to see the app wizard was because I am interested in how direct-x sets up the window. The dirct-x demos have the option for video settings and I wanted to do the same. Is there a demo/source just on this somewhere?
The reason I wanted to see the app wizard was because I am interested in how direct-x sets up the window. The dirct-x demos have the option for video settings and I wanted to do the same. Is there a demo/source just on this somewhere?
VS .Net is WAYYY more stable than VS 6.0, but the UI is a bit harder to get. I prefered .Net once once I got used to it.
Pretty much everything that has been said is true. VS. NET is overall an improvement over VS 6. Some people don''t like the new IDE, but that could just be a matter of not liking change. One of the biggest problems with the IDE is that it''s a lot slower than the VC6 IDE. Most of it is implemented with .NET instead of MFC. If you have a fast machine this isn''t a problem at all, but on slower machines it can be annoying.
which is exactly why i put VC 6.0 on this old 233 mhz laptop, and will put .NET 2k3 on my desktop whenever i free some hdd space...
edit: also, wanted to add... whoever said this was right, VC 6.0 isn't all that 100% compliant... it has to do w/ streams and deconstruction order. usually this won't affect many, but it really screwed up logging system in my prev engine attempt. basically, i had it destroy a singleton atexit() and when atexit() would call the destructor, the streams would already be destroyed (when they shouldn't have been yet) and i coldn't get time/date properly for my log. the way i fixed it was by getting some lib replacement for std streams. =\ not pretty.
if u want, i can give u some source to show u this.
---
shurcool
wwdev
[edited by - shurcooL on July 7, 2003 5:32:16 PM]
edit: also, wanted to add... whoever said this was right, VC 6.0 isn't all that 100% compliant... it has to do w/ streams and deconstruction order. usually this won't affect many, but it really screwed up logging system in my prev engine attempt. basically, i had it destroy a singleton atexit() and when atexit() would call the destructor, the streams would already be destroyed (when they shouldn't have been yet) and i coldn't get time/date properly for my log. the way i fixed it was by getting some lib replacement for std streams. =\ not pretty.
if u want, i can give u some source to show u this.
---
shurcool
wwdev
[edited by - shurcooL on July 7, 2003 5:32:16 PM]
If you are a student you could go to the website below to get a copy of Visual Studio.net 2003. You need proof you are a student. Visual Studio.net 2003 retails for over $1,000 but if you are a student you could buy the Academic version. The Academic version cost(check out the website below) about $85.95 which is very cheap and it has all the features of VS.net 2003 Pro . I plan on buying a copy myself when I go to college. I had doubts about buying a Academic version but I noticed a website where a guy emailed Microsoft about the license and they said its has the same license as a retail copy. That means you can use it for commercial puporses as far as I know.
http://www.academicsuperstore.com/market/marketdisp.html?PartNo=632673&
http://www.academicsuperstore.com/market/marketdisp.html?PartNo=632673&
To go against all the others, I have had nothing but problems with Visual Studio .NET Pro and Academic 2003. I''ve used both, Pro was for a programming competition and I had it crash at least once everytime I used it, although I think the main reason it crashed was because we were using managed C++. I''m using Academic now and I haven''t had many problems with it other than its really slow and it took about an hour and a half to two hours to install. People say it has a better optimizer than VC 6, but I haven''t seen that. The managed programs we made were on average about 5x bigger than the source we ported from.
Of course make your own decision about it, but I always feel more comfortable with VC 6 than .NET.
Brad
Of course make your own decision about it, but I always feel more comfortable with VC 6 than .NET.
Brad
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
