|
Visual studio is not very fast neither you know  . Yeah, it's right, sometimes Eclipse is a bit slow but on the other hand, writing code with it goes much faster (the refactoring tool for instance is extremely powerful).
|
|
|
|
|
Cedric Moonen wrote: Visual studio is not very fast neither you know
Well, Visual Studio is faster.
Cedric Moonen wrote: Yeah, it's right, sometimes Eclipse is a bit slow but on the other hand, writing code with it goes much faster (the refactoring tool for instance is extremely powerful).
In my (actually short) experience Eclipse was indeed powerful, but deadly slow.
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
CPallini wrote: Well, Visual Studio is faster.
Faster at what? Most of the time it is just a simple editor being driven by a human.
CPallini wrote: Eclipse was indeed powerful, but deadly slow.
Never had this problem; obviously my brain is too slow for the average IDE. 
|
|
|
|
|
On my system Visual Studio startup is slow. However, Eclipse startup never completes... 
My brain is sluggish, but the monkey rants
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
I had to work with a team of Java "developers" a while ago. They complained that one of our DLLs were not working right with Java and our company sent me to see what was wrong. I went.
They fired up the IDE. And then it was booting. Was booting. Booting. Still. Seriously. After a long time, it was still booting.
I looked at them and asked "Do you spend every day of your life like this?". I was all serious in my query, but they took it "sportively" and laughed. I was speechless.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
CPallini wrote: apt-get install g++
Better to install build-essentials. It will install GCC and other utilities like make.
Best wishes,
Navaneeth
|
|
|
|
|
Linux distributions come with all the necessary tools for development. You will use the GCC compiler, and you have several IDE's to choose: KDevelop, Eclipse for C++, QtCreator, VI/Emacs... If you want to do GUI development you should choose between GTK or Qt/KDE libraries. I would target Qt, since it is crossplatform and a really nice object oriented GUI library.
--
Si dos montan un caballo, uno debe ir detrás.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd like to recommend Qt Creator[^], it's an awesome IDE + gui library. The best part of it is that it's available under Windows and under Linux, so if you create a project under the Windows version of QtCreator and then just copy it on a Windows machine, you can open it and compile it there and create exactly the same app that would work under Linux.
There is sufficient light for those who desire to see, and there is sufficient darkness for those of a contrary disposition.
Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
AFAIK, most Linux distros come with deveoloper tools. You might want to take a look at the Code Blocks IDE[^], which is cross-platform.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have asked the same question yesterday but could not get the desired result. My question is
"what is the best way to migrate C++ application from vs6 to vs8".
1. If vs8 migrate automatically then what changes have been done?
2. Will I have to change API?
3. Is there other method of migration?
Waiting for reply.....
|
|
|
|
|
Will anybody give answer of this question?
|
|
|
|
|
Dev-2 wrote: Will anybody give answer of this question?
Where do you think you are ? This is a message board, not a chat here. So be patient!
Now for your question, there's no automatic or magic way to migrate from VC6 to a more recent version. What you have to do is open your VC6 workspace with VS2005, then a conversion wizard will appear asking you if you want to convert the project. This only converts the project files, not the source files. Once the conversion is done, you'll need to compile and check if everything is ok. If you have errors, well you need to fix them and recompile. And if other errors appear, you have to repeat the operation .
One of the most frequent source of error coming from that kind of migration, is the support for UNICODE. By default in vc6 it is disabled but for more recent IDE, it is enabled. It means that if you used char instead of TCHAR in your code, you'll end up with a lot of errors. I suggest you read this article[^] if you want more information (you could also disable UNICODE support in your project options).
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
How to declare "Global Variable" that whole class in the project(MFC) can see this variable.
Where's to declare it?
Please Help.
modified on Thursday, November 19, 2009 12:37 AM
|
|
|
|
|
If your project is SDI or MDI then you gave a class drived from CWinApp.
look at the header file there is an extern object. declare your object just like that.
www.logicsims.ir
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just Declare in stdAfx.h without extern.
CString tmp; is enough.
G.Paulraj
|
|
|
|
|
If you need a variable visible to all classes of your project, an option maybe a static member variable of your CWinApp-derived class.
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't need to be static. Presumably, there's only one instance of the app and it's there for the duration. But I like the placement.
You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists.
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't need to be static? The OP said he needs it 'everywhere'. For instance, think of those classes that are his own (and have no access to the CWinApp derivative). They won't be able to touch the variable unless it is static.
The fact that I consider a singleton class instead of a global variable a better option is aside though.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
You have access to the instance of the CWinApp derived class anywhere you include the .h file with extern AppClass the App. There is only one of them. The member of that class he wants is NOT static but a regular memeber. There is, presumably, still only one of them and it's available anywhere through the app instance, theApp.theVarible or theApp.GetVariable() depending on how anal you are about accessor functions. I fall into the anal category. 
You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists.
|
|
|
|
|
Never mind, I actually got your comment wrong. I fall into your category as well.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Craig wrote: You have access to the instance of the CWinApp derived class anywhere you include the .h file with extern AppClass the App.
There's no need to expose the application object anywhere you need just one variable.
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
True, but then there's no technical reason we need object oriented code either. But if a variable needs to be seen by the whole application, then encapsulating it in the app class seems the perfect place for it.
You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
