why people use C++
Im my opinion C# and managed DX is really more intuitive and simple. For beginners its the winning combo IMO.
Why people still going with C++ ?
heh, you know this is probably going to turn into a flame war, don't you? Anyway, first of all, DX only works on windows and C# encorages(in my opinion) bad naming conventions. And C# was pretty much only created as microsofts response to sun making java(Notice the naming conventions are exactly the oposite of java's).
Quote:Original post by thoue
Im my opinion C# and managed DX is really more intuitive and simple. For beginners its the winning combo IMO.
Why people still going with C++ ?
Because people may disagree with your points of view about C# and managed DX.
Because there are other platforms to develop for beyond Mrs.Windows.
Because people already know c++ and has a lot of stuff already working with it, and other libraries that are not DX.
lots of reasons.
Personally, I like to develop applications under linux, where there is no C# (at least doesn't come with my distro) and much less DX.
The documentation for Managed DirectX sucks compared to the documentation for straight DirectX, although this has gotten better with the latest DirectX SDK.
Despite what anyone tells you, Managed code is still slower than unmanaged code.
Managed DirectX is still dependent on unmanaged code segments so you don't get the free garbage collection (see IDisposable)
C++, in my opinion, is more straightforward and clearer than C# as to what it is doing...C# gives up some of unmanaged C++'s clarity for simplicity and ease. This is inherant as C# is compiled to managed code before being turned into x86 code. Then again, C++ gives up some of assembly's clarity for simplicity and ease.
For doing .net stuff, C# is a dream. But I'm on the fence about using Managed DirectX + C# versus unmanaged DirectX and C++.
Despite what anyone tells you, Managed code is still slower than unmanaged code.
Managed DirectX is still dependent on unmanaged code segments so you don't get the free garbage collection (see IDisposable)
C++, in my opinion, is more straightforward and clearer than C# as to what it is doing...C# gives up some of unmanaged C++'s clarity for simplicity and ease. This is inherant as C# is compiled to managed code before being turned into x86 code. Then again, C++ gives up some of assembly's clarity for simplicity and ease.
For doing .net stuff, C# is a dream. But I'm on the fence about using Managed DirectX + C# versus unmanaged DirectX and C++.
Also, if a person only uses C++ with plain-Jane DirectX, end users don't need to download the .NET framework in order to use it...it will work assuming the person has DirectX (which most users, especially gamers do).
C# and Managed DirectX are really awesome. However, they require the .NET Framework installed in order for your game to work. The user must have the latest .NET Framework (20MB) + Managed DirectX (16MB 9.0c). Depending how computer savvy your audience is, this maybe asking way to much.
Customers shy away from games if the newest tech doesnt work on their computer, especially in the 'casual' game market. Some customers dont even know what DirectX is, let alone .NET and Managed DirectX. Plus if you wanted to port the game to Mac or Linux, it would be difficult from a development standpoint.
As great as C# is, I dont think it will be practical until the .NET Framework has a large install base (ie when Longhorn debuts).
Customers shy away from games if the newest tech doesnt work on their computer, especially in the 'casual' game market. Some customers dont even know what DirectX is, let alone .NET and Managed DirectX. Plus if you wanted to port the game to Mac or Linux, it would be difficult from a development standpoint.
As great as C# is, I dont think it will be practical until the .NET Framework has a large install base (ie when Longhorn debuts).
why use a platform specific library like DirectX, when you can get just as many features on something like OGRE that works on multiple platforms?(and what ogre doesn't have, you can use SDL to do)
There are much more already-created libraries and examples in C++, that it isn't funny anymore. It's kinda scary man, it really is.
C# is still the new bunny, but to many people, it seems to heavy-weight comparing to C++. It's not that grab-and-go.
C# is still the new bunny, but to many people, it seems to heavy-weight comparing to C++. It's not that grab-and-go.
SLOW!
no body uses C# and especially not managed DX in any type of real game project.
maybe for beginners but, it just oversimplifies the whole 3d process, hiding and masking everything, so really you cant learn that much from something that hides just about everything from you. same thing with learning VB as a first language...sure you can program "advanced looking" things right away, but honestly how much have you really learned? also it just fortifies bad techniques and algorithm design early on, making it harder on you later on to step out of your protective environment.
no body uses C# and especially not managed DX in any type of real game project.
maybe for beginners but, it just oversimplifies the whole 3d process, hiding and masking everything, so really you cant learn that much from something that hides just about everything from you. same thing with learning VB as a first language...sure you can program "advanced looking" things right away, but honestly how much have you really learned? also it just fortifies bad techniques and algorithm design early on, making it harder on you later on to step out of your protective environment.
i use C++ because i dont like the syntax of C# and Java, its easier for me, there are more resources in the internet about C++ than C# (i think, i dont know. see this: http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=c%2B%2B&q2=C%23&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us) and i already know C++.
simply, i dont need C# & i dont like it.
simply, i dont need C# & i dont like it.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement