C++ Compiler

[Ginger_Ale]

Presumably you're still at school. You can get academic copies of these for a fraction of the cost, yet still the same functionallity. Look into it!

Also:
I used to program exclusively in VB 6. I have a copy of visual studio.net, and have started learning C# => much more powerful than VB.

Visual Studio.net is a collection of compilers for different programming languages, yet they all compile to basically the same executable. In fact, you can write part of the program in one language, and the rest in another. In theory, its also platform indpendent (as long as there is the .net framework and Common Language Runtimes for the different OSs (Linux, Unix, Mac).

Yes, I'm still in school. I'll check it out.

Thanks for the bottom paragraph. That's what I was looking for. .NET is a collection of compilers, and Visual Basic is a language, as well as C++, C, C#, etc, etc.. ok.

VB is like a, say, 'watered-down' (in terms of difficulty of writing) version of C++? Is it safe to say that?

edit: A quick Google search yielded this. Hey, that doesn't look half bad. $60.

 

[ainwood]

Yes, I'm still in school. I'll check it out.

Thanks for the bottom paragraph. That's what I was looking for. .NET is a collection of compilers, and Visual Basic is a language, as well as C++, C, C#, etc, etc.. ok.

VB is like a, say, 'watered-down' (in terms of difficulty of writing) version of C++? Is it safe to say that?

edit: A quick Google search yielded this. Hey, that doesn't look half bad. $60.

Well, VB is easier to learn than C++ (well I think it is). I guess you could call it 'watered-down', but its not only the difficulty, its also the functionallity.

The original VB does not have the same support for object-orientation (the standard way that programs are written nowadays) that C++ has. However, VB.net DOES have this functionallity!

VB (normal and .net) are both a lot more "forgiving" than C++, which really cuts down on the difficulty learning curve. For example, VB looks after memory management for you, whereas (I think) in C++ you have to remember to do it yourself. I'm no C++ expert though (can 'read' the basics of it, but couldn't do much more!)

 

[Craig_San]

I have used both Borland C++ Builder and MS Visual C++ 6.0 (and MS Visual Basic). If you want a standard MS-Windows app with standard Windows and controls - go for Borland. It is great, you draw your screen, draw your controls and then just add code where needed.

If you want to use Direct X, go for MS-Visual C++. It works.

You have to do a lot of work to make a standard Windows app in Visual C++. (Maybe easier in later versions).

While you are supposed to be able to write Direct X in builder (and there are people who can tell you how to do it), I found it too hard.

(I gotta getta picture)

 

[Sirp]

Personally, at my job at a Fortune 500 company, I use GNU C++ running on Linux -- all completely free software, and have found it to be a very effective development environment.

Visual Studio is nice too, but it is fairly expensive.

Python is a very nice language for beginners imo, and it's free. The only area where its probably inferior to VB is for doing Windows-based GUI apps.

-Sirp.

 

[ainwood]

Python is a very nice language for beginners imo, and it's free. The only area where its probably inferior to VB is for doing Windows-based GUI apps.

-Sirp.

And is it actually supported by a compiler yet? I thought it was still strictly a scripting language?

 

[Sirp]

And is it actually supported by a compiler yet? I thought it was still strictly a scripting language?

Well, it is compiled into Bytecode, in a similiar fashion to Java. In fact, there is an implementation known as Jython which will compile Python into Java Bytecode. But the main implementation uses its own bytecode.

This is how it has always worked.

This is also reasonably similiar to how .Net works. In fact, I believe Python is also a .Net-supported language.

Naturally to execute the bytecode, you need a Python runtime on your system, in a similiar way to needing a JVM on your system to execute Java bytecode, or the .Net CLR to execute .Net programs.

Python is considered by many to be a 'scripting language', but this term is very very vague. Probably even more vague than 'object oriented'.

As a disclaimer, I don't like Python very much for doing anything very serious, but I would say the same about VB, and C#, and Java. And I think Python is the easiest to learn of any of them.

-Sirp.

 

[Chieftess]

Personally, I like C++ over Visual Basic too (I know of a few 'hardcore C/C++ programmers' who really look down on Visual Basic), but, I don't really have a choice. (The lead programm perfers using Visual Basic the simpliest way possible.) Atleast I can buy a C++/C# book, and write the Visual Basic equivalent.

Now, not having design docs to work with... that's a challenge.

 

[Ginger_Ale]

So visual basic pretty much does the same thing as C++, but it's easier to 'make' graphics? You can still make buttons in C++, but is it a lot harder?

I'll see if I can download a 'trial' of Visual Basic this weekend. Then I'll play around with it.

Sirp, I know about Python. There's a thread in the Civ4 forum about programming in Python...I wasn't too interested though.

 

[Sirp]

Well most programming languages "pretty much do the same thing" as each other, they just have different approaches to exactly how things should be done.

For less experienced programmers, especially if working on a small project, VB is almost certainly easier than C++ for doing things in.

Also, Chieftess is right: there are many considerations other than programming language which have an effect on how successful your project will be. Knowing exactly what you're trying to build is far more important than what you choose to build it in.

-Sirp.

 

[Comraddict]

Ahem....
VB:

Public Function Add()
    Add = 1 + 5
End Function

C#:

int Add()
{return 1 + 5;}

(same as C++ for this).

You didn't optimize anything. In assembler it is gonna look the same, since you used same methods.

 

[ainwood]

You didn't optimize anything. In assembler it is gonna look the same, since you used same methods.

I didn't try to optimize it. Point was that the VB function wouldn't have compiled.

 

[Chieftess]

I didn't try to optimize it. Point was that the VB function wouldn't have compiled.

It was still morning when I wrote that.

 

[Comraddict]

So visual basic pretty much does the same thing as C++, but it's easier to 'make' graphics? You can still make buttons in C++, but is it a lot harder?

I'll see if I can download a 'trial' of Visual Basic this weekend. Then I'll play around with it.

Sirp, I know about Python. There's a thread in the Civ4 forum about programming in Python...I wasn't too interested though.

Hm, VC++ is much more powerful and allows you to optimize speed. Anything done well on C++ will run faster than best solution of Basic, or pretty much any high level programming language. Assembler, which is not high level prog lagnuage, is only thing that will run even faster.
For any serious work, C++ is neccessity, think games, operating systems, embedded software. Also C/C++ "owns" 90% of total embedded software market, rest is java.

 

[ainwood]

Hm, VC++ is much more powerful and allows you to optimize speed. Anything done well on C++ will run faster than best solution of Basic, or pretty much any high level programming language. Assembler, which is not high level prog lagnuage, is only thing that will run even faster.
For any serious work, C++ is neccessity, think games, operating systems, embedded software. Also C/C++ "owns" 90% of total embedded software market, rest is java.

Well, the same program written in any of the VisualStudio.net programs essentially compile to the same .exe (if you allow for the limitations in functionallity). Given this, I have read rumours that Visual C# is likely to replace Visual C++ for many microsoft-written programs (including the office suites, apparently). But given that it requires the .net CLR, this probably won't happen until the next OS (longhorn).

 

[Craig_San]

C++ is my favourite too. You can do elegant and abstract things in it - which are difficult in VB. But I wouldn't want to be in a hurry and I wouldn't want to be paying someone to do it.

 

[Comraddict]

Well, the same program written in any of the VisualStudio.net programs essentially compile to the same .exe (if you allow for the limitations in functionallity). Given this, I have read rumours that Visual C# is likely to replace Visual C++ for many microsoft-written programs (including the office suites, apparently). But given that it requires the .net CLR, this probably won't happen until the next OS (longhorn).

there is much more market outside microsoft than you want to see. only small amount of programming is done for windows and desktops. c++ allows more direct and richer control of hardware, especially memory. of course that VB has its use, but it is limited to windows applications where performance is not crucial.