D2X-XL Launcher... NEED HELP

[D3Phoenix]

Okay, I give up. I have this thing SO CLOSE to working it is NOT EVEN funny. But It has hacked me off enough and I have wasted enough time on it that I am ready to quit with it. Probably, ok, well, IT IS, mostly Visual Studio .NET's fault.

I need somebody to do one of the following...
A. Take my code and convert it to C++ (or some other non-platform specific language that will let you make a RAW EXE instead of some STUPID CLIENT-SERVER CRAP. I HATE .NET!! DIE!!!...)

B. Fix whatever is keeping it from running and leave it as VB.NET

I refuse to let you guys down because I'm getting frustrated. The code is open to ANYONE as of right now. It's in a zip if anybody wants to host it.

If nothing else, I will port it to VB6... something that I KNOW works. I had never undertaken a project in .NET before, and now I regret it with all my heart. WHY WHY WHY DIDN'T I take that C++ class in 10th grade...?

[EDIT]
Have just NUKED .NET and all its remnants from my machine, except for my code. This solves my other annoyances with debuggers constantly wanting to run, as well. Just started rebuilding the interface in VB6... Will have to pull a TON of search...replace action to get the code into a workable VB6 state... *sigh*

Somehow I feel much, much better now...

[Peter]

BOOM! D'oh, well, have fun with find & replace.

[D3Phoenix]

BOOM! D'oh, well, have fun with find & replace.

I hate you too.

Already started on it, though find/replace prolly won't be as big of a headache as I first thought. The big pain will be making the interface and naming / captioning all of those controls ALL OVER AGAIN, ONE at a time... Wish me luck...

(SURE nobody wants to port it to C++? )

[Verran]

Sent you a PM.

[Diedel]

(SURE nobody wants to port it to C++? )

That would be a good start for you to learn C++.

I don't know about VB, but with MSVC .NET you can buid standalone exes.

If you want a C++ app as a base for porting, I can give you the source code of one I had built a while ago and the UI of which is pretty close to what you need. It has a lot of customization stuff, liking colored buttons, or buttons with some image as background, etc.

Well, here's the stuff. Download link at the bottom. Take a look at it - it's pretty neat and contains a lot of custom stuff. Your once in a life time chance,dude!

You could rip out all the app specific stuff and use the UI code to make the launcher from it. I might help you with getting into C/C++.

[D3Phoenix]

Diedel, you are truly amazing.

I just might learn C++ yet -- I know the theory behind high-level languages such as Java, C, C++, and such, but I don't know the syntaxes. This will surely help.

In the interest of time, however, I will finish my VB6 interface first and get that working. Verran is interested in the .NET code, which I will go ahead and send, but I think it would be better to get the VB6 version working, followed by a port to C++, in the interest of compatability.

[Valin Halcyon]

Proper OOP programming is easy once you learn the syntax. All a programming language is, is syntax and standard function (or in this case, class) libraries. Going from VB to C aught to be easy.

BTW, I feel your pain on the .NET issue. I use MS Visual Studio 6 for Windows dev.

[Diedel]

Phoenix,

did you check out PABC?

[Suncho]

Proper OOP programming is easy once you learn the syntax.

I disagree. You can know C++ from top to bottom and not have a clue about proper object oriented analysis and design. It's possible to learn OOP without learning C++ and it's possible to learn C++ without learning OOP.

Regardless, he doesn't need to use OOP to make a launcher.

...and if you're still on Visual Studio 6, you're missing out. What don't you like about the new ones?

[D3Phoenix]

Agreed. I already know VB and the general principles of OOP, polymorphism and encapsulation and so forth -- All this I learned well after I learned VB6. .NET uses it heavily. I LOVE the new .NET language, syntax, and IDE tools, but I despise the way it handles certain things.

* I can no longer do control arrays. I have to iterate through controls with some sort of crazy loop structure that takes way more code and it less efficient.

* File handling was FINE in VB6... it is majorly broken in VB.NET; way more complicated. I thought .NET was supposed to make things SIMPLER...

* I CAN'T GET IT TO MAKE A STANDALONE EXE!! It always wants to publish it to an installer package. When I try to just copy the EXE and use THAT on another machine, it says \".NET Framework 2.0 required\" and aborts, whether or not said system has .NET already.

* I can't just set an object to \"Nothing\" or \"Null\" anymore to destroy it and free the memory. Instead I have to call dispose, and if I want to make my own object be able to clean up after itself, I have to implement IDisposable and run through tons of checks -- the code looks very complicated...

Most of this was just fine in VB6. I don't want to re-learn it, especially since I can do the same things much more easily from VB6. What I really want to do is learn C++. No I haven't had a chance to look at PABC in depth, but I took a quick glimpse at some of the code and could already see similarities to JAVA -- this might be easier to do than I originally thought.

[Suncho]

C++ is very similar to Java. If you know both Java and VB, you should have no trouble picking most of it up. You already understand the object-oriented aspect, so all you need to learn is the slight variation in syntax.

[Valin Halcyon]

I dislike the newer Visual Studios for the same general reason. They're easier IF you learned on them..but if you learned on the old stuff..forget it.

I hate .NET too in general, makes porting a pain in the ass.

[D3Phoenix]

Okay, I'm working on the VB6 interface. When its done, I'll get the working copy posted and later I might get around to porting it to C++, which I am definitely going to learn. Would anyone like to reccomend good *free* complilers? I already have copies of Visual C++ 6.0 and C++ .NET 2005 -- but if those are in any way \"corrupted\" and windows-only, no thanks. I'd prefer a \"pure\" IDE to learn on, then maybe I can apply GOOD HABITS to the M$ stuff.

[Steel]

Would anyone like to reccomend good *free* complilers?

Gladly.
http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html

The BEST free C++ comiler for windows. But it hasn't been updated for over a year. If you wan't to use WxWidgets, a cross-platform gui library, then use:
http://wxdsgn.sourceforge.net/

It is updated more often and has some bugfixes that Dev-cpp 4.992 does not have.
Hope this helps.

Edit: posted wrong link for WxDev-Cpp. Oops

[Diedel]

Imo the MSVC .NET IDEs are a PITA to use. I *hate* them.

[D3Phoenix]

Imo the MSVC .NET IDEs are a PITA to use. I *hate* them.

I'll avoid them then. I'll take a look at some compilers tonight.

[Diedel]

I usually work with MSVC C++ v6 (SP 5 or 6). I only use .NET when I need to profile stuff, because AQtime doesn't integrate with v6.

My main problem with .NET is that it's workspace concept (called a 'solution') always considers all sub projects as depending on each other, and all the time tries to compile them all when I just want a single one to be compiled. And it doesn't remember your last choice: You have to select your current project (leading e.g. to the desired exe or dll) everytime again.

That's a general problem with the MSVC IDEs: They don't memorize stuff, they don't have a 'apply current choice to all similar subsequent cases' etc. So they do work, but using them can be a PITA. And then, .NET has so many subwindows you need a 30\" monitor to really be able to use it without constantly closing or resizing window panes. Ack. The guys who have been coding/are using this at M$ must either darn friggin noobs, or masochists with a passion for endless suffering.

[D3Phoenix]

... constantly closing or resizing window panes. Ack. The guys who have been coding/are using this at M$ must either darn friggin noobs, or masochists with a passion for endless suffering.

Or the ones that DO complain are simply made to disappear...

[Diedel]

Maybe they all have 30\" TFTs.

[Peter]

Maybe the have Exposé. Oh, wait, it is Microsoft and they use Windows... Suckers...

;p Couldn't resist.

[Sirius]

The compiler behind Dev-C++ is MinGW (current version is 3.1.0 I think).

The Dev-C++ IDE itself is ... well, okay, except for two main problems;

- Debugging is very slow, unstable and generally sucks ass
- Automatic indentation generally sucks ass

Apart from that, it works. But don't expect anything like Eclipse or MSVC.

[Diedel]

Or the ones that DO complain are simply made to disappear...

Bill Gates waves his magic wand, which happens to go by the name Steve Ballmer, and ... Poof!

(Tune of 'another one bites the dust' playing in the background)

[Peter]

Or the ones that DO complain are simply made to disappear...

Bill Gates waves his magic wand, which happens to go by the name Steve Ballmer, and ... Poof!

(Tune of 'another one bites the dust' playing in the background)

Hahahaha!

Or, Bill Gates waves his arm in front of you while breathing heavily, saying "There is nothing wrong with .Net."