From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,dc3cd65b8421a1e9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Marin David Condic Subject: Re: gtkada/glade info needed Date: 2000/10/01 Message-ID: <39D6E47D.295EE90B@acm.org>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 676114119 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <39D65E94.DD8563E@acm.org> X-Accept-Language: en X-Server-Date: 1 Oct 2000 07:14:44 GMT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Quadrus Corporation Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-10-01T07:14:44+00:00 List-Id: DuckE wrote: > Excuse me... but I installed MSVC++ 6.0 and decided to give it a try. I > diligently typed in the code for the sample "scribble" application. Guess > what. It didn't run. > > I had to download a service pack off the net to get it to work. I think > they're up to SP4 now in MSVC++ 6.0. > > I didn't find MSVC++ easy to understand, nor did I find building > applications using the Wizards to be intuitive or easy. Now if you want ot > make a case for VB or Delphi, I'll go along with that. > O.K. Your experience with it runs contrary to mine. When I installed it, I fired it up, pointed it at a body of C++ code we had around here and told it to get started compiling. It did. Maybe the release you got was buggy. It certainly doesn't speak well of *any* application if the "demo" stuff doesn't work. Also, please observe that I did not say that MSVC++ was intuitively obvious to even the most casual observer. It is not. Nor is Windows programming in general. However, it *is* well documented and I did not encounter any statements in the documentation claiming that it *was* easy to intuit your way through it. If you like VB or Delphi better - fine. I am not trying to make the case that MSVC++ is the greatest of all possible development kits. I can certainly imagine better ones - maybe someone else has done the same. My case is *only* that it comes as a complete suite of stuff that all works together and all from a single source. There are some very nice tools out there for Ada. There are some very good compilers and GUI development suites and all that stuff like that there. And often the price is a lot more attractive than that of MSVC++. You'll just have to visit a dozen different web pages to get them all and they won't all just run nicely with each other from the same root window and you'll probably have to visit a dozen other web sites to find documentation that explains what all the stuff is about and how to use it. (Some of this comes from the fact that many of the tools are offshoots or bindings to other tools. X is a binding to Y which was built on top of Z and X just refers you to the documentation for Y which refers you to Z and if you weren't born knowing Z, you're SOL. Did that make sense? :-) As a consumer of development tools, I'm merely expressing what I'd like to see in the way of an Ada development kit. It is the wise and successful capitalist that tries to give the customer what he wants. :-) I'd be more than happy to talk to any vendors about what I like in MSVC++ and what I don't like about it. Send me a marketing survey. MDC -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - http://www.quadruscorp.com/ Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m Visit my web site at: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Giving money and power to Government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." -- P. J. O'Rourke ======================================================================