|
I've never really done anything serious with doc/view in MFC. I've dabbled a bit so I could learn how it works, but since I like UI development best, most of the stuff I do is using the UI classes. WTL provides that with a much smaller footprint, and while the message maps are a bit awkward to write (no ClassWizard to automagically give you the right handler prototype), the F12 key does the trick just fine.
So I've switched to WTL for all of my work for the past few months, and haven't missed MFC one bit. (hmmm, this is sounding like an Apple commercial...  ) The ATL windowing system is just so simple, and there are even things that MFC doesn't have, like an easy-to-use CBitmapButton and CHyperLink.
--Mike--
Just released - 1ClickPicGrabber - Grab & organize pictures from your favorite web pages, with 1 click!
My really out-of-date homepage
Sonork-100.19012 Acid_Helm
|
|
|
|
|
WTL provides that with a much smaller footprint
If you think MFC has a big bootprint, wait till you move to .NET. You are going to move, are you?
|
|
|
|
|
I'll consider .NET when all our customers are using XP/W2K. At the moment over 60% of our customers are still using Win9x - 10% of them are still on Win95! (sb, sob). Until that day, WTL is the framework for me.
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
|
|
|
|
|
Until that day, WTL is the framework for me.
So, how do you feel that WTL will die sooner or later, probably sooner than later? Considering that it never had a good life as MFC did.
|
|
|
|
|
ha ha ha. Have you even looked at WTL? Do you even know how it works? It won't die soon - perhaps not until the entire Windows development community has moved to .NET (5 years? longer?).
Even if the MS guy who developed it never touches it again, someone else will pick it up - it is a collection of C++ templates - all in a dozen or so header files. Unlike monolithic MFC, it is easy to maintain and easy to extend (and is easy to CVS too!).
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote:
I'll consider .NET when all our customers are using XP/W2K
Just curious because you've said this twice now; why XP/W2K? (besides that they're real OSs  )
98 and ME are supported by .NET and so long as you aren't doing something very graphical you probably won't have to write code to dispose of resources ASAP (and if you do use a lot of graphical things, its simple to get it running on 9X and not run out of GDI memory).
James
"And we are all men; apart from the females." - Colin Davies
|
|
|
|
|
Having to ship a 20MB framework would freak our Win9x customers out (.NET is included with W2K SP3 and XP SP1 right???). Some of my apps are installed on thousands of Win9x clients, so having to install the .NET framework would become a big issue. Man, installing MFC DLLs in the early days used to be bad enough! (before I started to statically link...).
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote:
Having to ship a 20MB framework would freak our Win9x customers out
Ah, yeah that is the hardest part to justify.
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote:
.NET is included with W2K SP3 and XP SP1 right???
Good question, I have .NET installed on all my computers here so I didn't get to check after doing the upgrades. I would assume that it was because the SPs are so large; but then again maybe not.
James
"And we are all men; apart from the females." - Colin Davies
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote:
(before I started to statically link...).
YES! Statically linking is the only way to go. I *hate* when apps have to replace system files like MFC42.dll.
|
|
|
|
|
If WTL had come along five years earlier, then I would be using it everyday. I've just got too much MFC code to make a clean break. Even when starting new projects, I tend to stick with MFC because I've got so many libs based on it that rewriting them to WTL would cost me money.
I wait with interest to see where MS take the C++ GUI Framework, will we get an updated MFC, will we get WTL or will they give us something else.
Michael
Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I think that if we get any new C++ framework it is more likely to be template based like ATL/WTL...
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
|
|
|
|
|
One would hope so, but templates still freak a lot of programmers out... but I suppose those will be moving to C# anyways.
Michael
Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.
|
|
|
|
|
ha ha ha.
Yes, templates. The main reason more people don't use ATL/WTL methinks.
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote:
The main reason more people don't use ATL/WTL methinks.
I still find a lot of the template code in ATL a struggle to read but template have grown on me since I started to use more STL.
Of course the real reason that WTL hasn't taken off, is that it doesn't have all the easy to use wizards that MFC supports. 
Michael
Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.
|
|
|
|
|
Michael P Butler wrote:
but I suppose those will be moving to C# anyways.
Then there are those of us who want templates in C#
James
"And we are all men; apart from the females." - Colin Davies
|
|
|
|
|
James T. Johnson wrote:
Then there are those of us who want templates in C#
In that case, those C++ programmers who migrated to C# will migrate to VB.NET
I like generics, I couldn't live without my STL libraries now.
Michael
Programming is great. First they pay you to introduce bugs into software. Then they pay you to remove them again.
|
|
|
|
|
Michael P Butler wrote:
If WTL had come along five years earlier
... no Microsoft compilers would have been able to compile it...
|
|
|
|
|
Need help to construct a Message Unit header requiring TCP/IP to send a message to a mainframe, gather the information requeted and return the appropriate message back to the client. This needs to be written in VC++ (but would prefer Visual Basic 6.0). Need immediate response with code snippet in VC++ or VB. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHJAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!
1. Get an account if it's so urgent, you'll be notified via email when people reply.
2. This is what we like to call a poll. In other words, you can vote for something here, and comment on it. Codeproject also has a number of programming forums, where you're far more likely to get a response.
VC is not my cup of tea... wrote:
This needs to be written in VC++ (but would prefer Visual Basic 6.0).
And there's the problem. A VB programmer being forced to use C++ is a recipe for disaster. If you *prefer* VB, you can't possibly know anything about C++, except maybe that it's scary for you.
If you think I am rude, consider how rude it is to tell us you 'need immediate response' ? Do we know you ? Work for you ? Care ?
Christian
Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002
During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
|
|
|
|
|
This has to be a new high for the all time strangest place to post a question.
Tim Smith
"Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution."
Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
|
|
|
|
|
True. I used it as a chance to go out of my way to try and get someone else to quote me regarding VB, instead of vice versa. Don't think it's worked tho.
Christian
Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002
During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
|
|
|
|
|
Don't you just ![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif) love it when a business major is late on a programming project for school?
Gary R. Wheeler
|
|
|
|
|
I think MFC is easily the best framework around!!;P
|
|
|
|
|
Haven't you used any others ?
Christian
Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002
During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
|
|
|
|
|
I use MFC whenever I need to do GUI programming (which I hate), but I don't like it at all. It covers too many different things: from strings and user controls to ISAPI extensions and sockets (BTW MFC socket classes suck).
On the other hand, ATL is very nicely designed, however, I don't use COM, and have worked only with ATL Server.
As for STL, I use it all the time, but I was much more enthusiastic about it in the beginning than now. The same goes for Boost.
But the craziest thing is that I have never found a good string class for C++ (std::basic_string sucks, as well as MFC CString).
![Beer | [beer]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
