Anybody else trying the new Visual c++ 2005 express edition?????

[OceanJeff32]

Well, don't bother!!  It's very limited, it's free, but it's very limited.

I've got a direct x 8.1 breakout with 2d sprites, and I haven't even gotten the thing to compile properly yet...

But with Visual c 6.0 or .NET it works just fine.

if you look in the provided docs you'll see the limitations, you have to purchase visual studio professional just to get ml.exe...masm!!!!!!!!!

oh well, life goes on,

later,

jeff c

p.s. by the way, sorry i haven't posted much lately, but I'm working on becoming a visual c++ 6.0 programmer for my NEWEST breakout, for which I have diverted BACK to direct x 8.1, using among other things...the ID3DXSprite Interface.  WHEN I am finished, the game will appear on gamealchemy.com (hopefully) and it will have 1 free level (maybe more...) but like 10 to 100 levels of breakout fun for a small fee.

I'll let you all know. I am on vacation this week, and am still working on the program(s).  Another idea that I had was to build an MASM version as well, but direct x stuff tricks me out.  The best that I can do, it publish a c++ version with inline assembly code for the collision detection.

later again,

jeff c
:U

[AeroASM]

Well, don't bother!!  It's very limited, it's free, but it's very limited.

It is not very limited, and it is not free, only the beta versions are free.

I've got a direct x 8.1 breakout with 2d sprites, and I haven't even gotten the thing to compile properly yet...

There are many language changes in C++ between 2003 and 2005, because they are conforming it to the CLS.

But with Visual c 6.0 or .NET it works just fine.

2005 is .NET. What kind of source code do you have that compiles in both native and .NET?

if you look in the provided docs you'll see the limitations, you have to purchase visual studio professional just to get ml.exe...masm!!!!!!!!!

Why do you care; you already have MASM.

[Jibz]

It is not very limited, and it is not free, only the beta versions are free.

It is out of beta now, and the final version is free for the first year (which sounds a bit like an extended public beta to me :green).

It's missing MFC and ATL. Also it doesn't contain the SDK but you can download that.

• Announcing the release of Visual Studio 2005 Express Editions
• ISO install images

[manhattan]

You can also preorder a trial version of Visual Studio Team suite:

https://www.tryvs2005.com/profile.aspx

[GregL]

I've got a direct x 8.1 breakout with 2d sprites, and I haven't even gotten the thing to compile properly yet...

But with Visual c 6.0 or .NET it works just fine.

I think I'm going to pass on Visual C++ 2005, it's really a mess. I tried the betas and was not impressed.

Visual C++ 2005 has a "new deployment model", read this and this, it's about the side-by-side DLL situation, with the runtime library etc. ::)

I have been monitoring this Visual C++ forum, people are having lots of problems with it.

I'm sticking with Visual C++ 2003 (and/or Pelle's C).

[GregL]

I still see no good reason to use Visual C++ 2005 Express Edition. I only see negatives. I currently use Visual C++ 2003 Standard Edition (and Pelles C).

It's tempting because it's free and it's new, so far I have resisited the temptation. I definitely wouldn't pay for the Visual Studio 2005 Standard or Professional Editions.

• What do you think about the Visual C++ 2005 Express Edition?
• What do you think about the Side-by-Side DLLs and the "new deployment model"?
• What do you think about Microsoft deprecating many of the ANSI Standard C Run-time Library functions?

[GregL]

I seem to be talking to myself here.  ::)

Regarding Visual C++ 2005, if you want your native (non-managed) application to run on another machine, you must use Windows Installer or equivalent. This is required because of the new C Run-time Library being Side-by-Side DLLs, they must be installed and registered, they cannot just be copied to the system directory. Registering the Side-by-Side DLLs involves creating policies, manifests, and writing some keys to the registry. What a PITA.

Also, the Express Edition lacks the capability of creating a setup project (and you lack the redist folder, and vcredist_x86). This article shows how to work around that problem: Bootstrapper for the VC++ 2005 Redists (with MSI3.1)

Using Side-by-Side DLLs is Microsoft's attempt to eliminate "DLL hell". I think they are just creating another type of hell. It also seems like they are forcing you into using Microsoft products. Nothing new there I guess.

[Mincho Georgiev]

Hi Greg,
That problem is resolved in the Full Pro Edition, cause you just can do a static link with the C++ runtime (that offcource will increase the executable's size),but unfortunately with the express edition to do that is from you custom batch build.

[GregL]

shaka_zulu,

Yes, you can link statically, but what if I don't want to do that? I shouldn't have to do that. It's a kludge, I expect better from Microsoft.

[Mincho Georgiev]

i'm agree, actually when was my first time using 2005's i was diassapointed as well. And I dont believe that 'Dll Hell' (as you've call it) will ends,no without static link. Maybe Microsoft are hopin' or they're just sure that their new runtimes (especially MSVCR80D.dll) to dominate after time ...

[hutch--]

There actually IS a use for the express edition, it gets you the latest editions of CL, LINK, CVTRES and RC and all you have to do is pick your way through the DLLs to get it all to work. My approach was to install it, immediately overwrite my boot partition with a current disk image them run the binaries to find out which DLL(s) the binaries need. This seems to be the "useful" list from the express edition. One of the irritations of having it installed is it takes over all of the appropriate file extensions so you suddenly have everything appear in its IDE instead of what you had before.


09/23/2005  09:17a             111,616 rcdll.dll
09/23/2005  09:17a              30,720 rc.exe
09/23/2005  06:56a              31,936 cvtres.exe
09/23/2005  07:01a              14,528 dumpbin.exe
09/23/2005  07:01a              14,528 editbin.exe
09/23/2005  06:56a              14,008 lib.exe
09/23/2005  06:56a             724,152 link.exe
09/22/2005  11:22p                 268 link.exe.config
09/22/2005  11:22p             438,272 msdis150.dll
09/23/2005  07:01a              82,616 nmake.exe
09/23/2005  07:29a             626,688 msvcr80.dll
09/23/2005  12:16a             172,032 mspdb80.dll

[GregL]

Hutch,

Have you tried to run an executable you created with VC 2005 on a machine that does not have Visual C++ 2005 installed? If I am not mistaken, you still have the problem of msvcr80.dll being a 'Side-by-Side' dll.

[hutch--]

Greg,

I only used the listed binaries and masm to see if I could get the linker and the rest to work. The binaries seem OK but I found the IDE such a pig, I did not bother. Interestingly enough, the C compiler has very clean output when just used for building seperate modules. I get the impression from your comments that they are trying to close the usage of the VC2005 package so it cannot be used anywhere else.

[zooba]

One of the irritations of having it installed is it takes over all of the appropriate file extensions so you suddenly have everything appear in its IDE instead of what you had before.

Won't an uninstall restore those? Or is M$ being impolite and not storing your previous settings  :snooty:

Maybe a registry backup first...  :bg

[GregL]

Hutch,

I don't want to install the VC++ 2005 Express IDE either. It can be installed along side VC++ 2003 but so far I have resisted. Like I said before, I tried the betas and wasn't impressed. I have also been doing some reading about Visual C++ 2005 and it's "new features". I just don't like the direction Microsoft is going. Although I may get dragged there, kicking and screaming.  :lol  If you haven't already, you should read some of the articles I posted links to above.