|
sorry ,there is no calss wizard in VC7
Mazy
"So,so you think you can tell,
Heaven from Hell,
Blue skies from pain,...
How I wish,how I wish you were here."
Wish You Were Here-Pink Floyd-1975
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if this is what people want? Anybody think this will ever change per developer request? Or do you all think it's a feature that has been left with VC++ 6.0-- and gone for good?
Travis D. Mathison ---
--- After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless ...
|
|
|
|
|
Travis D. Mathison wrote:
Or do you all think it's a feature that has been left with VC++ 6.0-- and gone for good?
That's because MS want make the interface of different languages the same
Mazy
"So,so you think you can tell,
Heaven from Hell,
Blue skies from pain,...
How I wish,how I wish you were here."
Wish You Were Here-Pink Floyd-1975
|
|
|
|
|
Ahh, yes. Ofcourse. I should have thought of that -- that makes sense then. 
Travis D. Mathison ---
--- After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless ...
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft has just changed the interface. All the features existing in VC 6.0 are also available in VC 7.0 also, but they have just moved to VB kind of interface.
You Can Add Function,Variable etc with normal right clicking on Class View.
If you want to add some message handlers, or event handlers you need to right click the class and then select its 'properties'. Then you can select the buttons on top for 'Events', 'Messages' handling.
It is a real fact that the previous interface in much more simpler than the one existing in VS.NET.
|
|
|
|
|
I've not yet looked at VC++ 7, having been concentrating on C#. But I expected that we might run into problems of this sort when we moved to a combined IDE. No doubt, some of the more ambitious of us (not me!)will write a ClassWizard add-in. If not, i expect it will reappear in the next version of VS.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
I recently ported an old VC++ program from 6.0 to .NET. There were a few issues to begin with, but the only thing that I've changed in the product is that I'm using the Shared DLL option to reference MFC now instead of Static Library. The program builds fine and runs, but when I perform pointer intensive operations the performance in .NET is horrible. We're talking an order of magnitude here. Execution that takes 2 seconds in 6.0 takes 30 seconds in .NET. I've tried all the optimizations I can think of but none of them did anything to increase performance. Should I just stick to 6.0 for now? Why is it so slow? It's unmanaged code so I don't think GC would be affecting performance at all. It seems like it is though. What's the deal? Any input is appreciated.
myenigmaself
http://myenigmaself.gaiden.com
myenigmaself@yahoo.com
"If debugging is the process of removing bugs from code, programming must be the process of putting them in."~~Dykstra
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't gotten to performance issues yet.
When I create dialogs in VC++ 7.0 they get some HTML code as well as a resource and DoModal() seems to be using both. Are you seeing this?
|
|
|
|
|
my issue was resolved once I moved to release build. debug is a lot slower in vc.net, but release is the same. I even noted a few performance improvements in .net.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I'm trying to send an object across a network and I'm trying to implement serialization but I'm not doing it right. I tried searching for tutorials and articles but they're for C#.
[Serializable]
__gc class FileTransferHeader
{
public:
FileTransferHeader(String* theFileName, Int64 theFileSize);
__property Int64 get_Size(){return fileSize;}
__property String* get_Name();
private:
Char fileName __nogc[256];
Int64 fileSize;
Int16 fileNameLength;
};
and later in some other class that has a networkstream, and a BinaryFormatter() and an object of type FileTransferHeader named theHeader.
I try theBinaryFormatter->Serialize(theNetworkStream, theHeader);
and I get an UE.
Unhandled Exception: System.Runtime.Serialization.SerializationException: The type $ArrayType$0x2984d64b in Assembly WinsockContinued, Version=1.0.792.39872, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null is not marked as serializable.
--------------------------
One problem with the programmer's mentality is insecurity. This goes deep. An insulting college litany says that failed mathematicians become computer programmers. They are also ridiculed for being nerdy losers, for being too fat or too skinny, and for having few social skills. Most programmers can be spotted easily in a crowd. Nobody really wants to hang out with them. Put thousands of these people in one company and if you can get them to work, you become a billiona
|
|
|
|
|
What I am wondering is how much of the .NET framework runs on the CLR. As i am looking through the .NET libraries with ILDASM, it seems most of the heavy processing is delegated to native functions. Everything appears to be just a big wrapper. I am not trying to trash .NET, i am a big fan. I was just wondering if Microsoft doesn't trust their CLR with heavy processing, how do they expect us to.
Again, I am no expert. The above assumption is based on a few hours of browsing "System.Drawing.dll".
Michael
|
|
|
|
|
I think what you might be seeing is the fact that GDI+ is distributed as a part of .NET, but it wasn't written for .NET. Thus many of the methods in System.Drawing will be making calls to it. I believe GDI+ has been shipping with the platform SDK since Feb. 2001.
A quick glance at System.XML's TextReader's Read method looks to be entirely written in .NET.
Then again that was just a quick glance 
James
Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki
"Smile your little smile, take some tea with me awhile.
And every day we'll turn another page.
Behind our glass we'll sit and look at our ever-open book,
One brown mouse sitting in a cage."
"One Brown Mouse" from Heavy Horses, Jethro Tull 1978
|
|
|
|
|
Think about what you're asking.
I think that MS won't rewrite the very native functions just to be "really .NET". Think about such basic functions like CreateProcess, DeleteFile, whatever... they are all wrapped up in .NET, but MS would be stupid to rewrite every function of the WinAPI.
If it wouldn't be like this, the .NET Framework (just read that word) would be a complete OS!
And what do you exactly mean by "heavy processing"? And why did you browse the System.Drawing.dll for _a few hours_? Hm anyway...
You should also compare the .NET Framework to the MFC Framework. Both delegate native stuff to the WinAPI, but still do their own business. .NET surely comes with these so powerful abbreviations like CLR, RCW and whatever - but as usual, they just sound great (which shall not mean that they aren't good things, but MS just pushes them too much and tries to make a big hype on them).
What we currently have is not much more than a Framework with some new dlls which bring their own environment for .NET assemblies.
|
|
|
|
|
What happened to Epsilon and/or Brief Emmulation modes that
used to exist in VS6? Has the emmulation modes option just
moved somewhere and I haven't found it or was it completely
removed? If it was removed, is this covered somewhere in the
help?
Thanks,
Brad
|
|
|
|
|
Where can one find details of how to add an Application to MSN Messenger. i.e. Add an option to say start application xxxxx with a selected user.
Or else get a list of MSN Contacts so that one can offer the user the option of communicating with application xxxx with that user.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a bizarre problem. When I have my firewall, ZoneAlarm, running on my development machine, and try to use the .Net debugger in either C# or C++, Visual Studio hangs. I have to kill it and restart it. I can run the program without debugging just fine, but no debugging. If I remove ZoneAlarm, this does not happen. ZoneAlarm never complains during this entire process.
Has anyone noticed anything similar? Removing my firewall protection everytime I want to debug is a bit of a nuisance.
"There's a slew of slip 'twixt cup and lip"
|
|
|
|
|
I'm running ZoneAlarm both at home and at work, and I have not had any problems you describe.
Are you sure you haven't said "No to all future requests"?
Sonorked as well: 100.13197 jorgen
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for responding.
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
Are you sure you haven't said "No to all future requests"?
You got me. I don't even see that as a setting option anywhere. I have given .Net full permission to access the internet and my local network if that is what you mean, eventhough every thing it needs to run is on my local machine.
ZoneAlarm seems to be handling everything else properly. It does not even seem to be aware that .Net is attempting to do anything when .Net hangs, but when I remove ZoneAlarm .Net behaves properly.
"There's a slew of slip 'twixt cup and lip"
|
|
|
|
|
I tried to use CORBA (omniORB) with .NET technology to make a webservice. I don't want to use a COM component and I think it's possible to do it. Calling a CORBA client from managed C++ doesn't work and creating a DLL including CORBA functions doesn't work too. It seems ASP.NET doesn't find the DLL. THe configuration of web.config and IIS5 doesn't change anything. Did anybody already try this?
ThanK
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that friend classes are not supported in MC++ and C#. C# has an internal modifier that can be used. But internal doesn't work in MC++. How is one suppose to add internal only functionality in managed C++?
Also one cannot inherit from a managed type in a template? Does anybody have a MC++ template class that inherits from IEnumerator and IEnumerable?
thanks
pat
|
|
|
|
|
patc wrote:
Also one cannot inherit from a managed type in a template? Does anybody have a MC++ template class that inherits from IEnumerator and IEnumerable?
Multible inherance is not possible when using Managed Code.
- Anders
Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
|
|
|
|
|
Multiple interface inheritance is supported. I should have used the phrase 'implements managed interface' instead of 'inherits'. I already have a MC++ collection class that implements IEnumerator and IEnumerable. I just can't turn it into a template.
pat
|
|
|
|
|
patc wrote:
Multiple interface inheritance is supported.
You, you are right about that, I just misunderstood your question...
- Anders
Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
|
|
|
|
|
Although read days of materials of .net on code project and msdn, i still not very clearly on the .net deploying.
What i want to design is a application of drawing and editing. I find the gdi+ in .net (i know gdi+ can deploy with a seperate gdiplus.dll) very helpful to my programming and i also want to make use of .net's new form framework, which events will ease my GUI building. But other stuff in .net like Database interface and web design is of no use to me at this moment.
To deploy the two features, do i need to package whole .NET? I think it will be too big for a small drawing application. And what's more my users still take win98 as main stream platform.
Can anyone experienced in this field give me some hint?
Thank you a lot
|
|
|
|
|
Chen, Fu wrote:
To deploy the two features, do i need to package whole .NET?
Yes, you have to distribute the .NET framework if you want to make use of the Windows Forms framework.
What you probably don't realize is that Windows Forms relies on many different parts of the framework. In fact I'd guess it uses just about every assembly in the framework (except for the web and sockets parts).
Chen, Fu wrote:
And what's more my users still take win98 as main stream platform.
Win98 is fine, Win95 however is not supported for .NET, though I don't know if you can trick the framework into running on Win95.
James
Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki
"My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT.
I may make you feel but I can't make you think." - Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull 1972
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
