|
I thought this was a hot topic 10 years ago...
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly what I was thinking. 
|
|
|
|
|
Look at the dates of the other comments...
This IS from 15 years ago! 
|
|
|
|
|
I have just three letters for MFC: WTL. Bye bye MFC. At least I'll never go back
|
|
|
|
|
"I hated mfc" and for a very long time I have programmed with the Win32 API. Now I have discovered its capabilities and I can't live without it. I think that it was a matter of ignorance... That't all... :
|
|
|
|
|
Both C (WIN32 call) or C++ (MFC WIN32 call) can solve problems, even with WTL WIN32 call, too. It just a matter of your own ability, unfortunately when team work comes into play, we need to justify the cost and manageable of a complex project. It takes double the time to train a WIN32 C programmer compare to MFC WIN32 programmer, it takes even longer to train an ATL based programmer.
You usually work alone, right
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder awakened from a deep sleep is a better programmer than most of us on our best day. I would tend to agree with whatever he says, based on his record.
Thanks Chris, for all you have done to help us "learners". You are tops.
Myle
|
|
|
|
|
Geez, don't tell him that! They'll be no living with his ego ;
|
|
|
|
|
Wow - that's high praise indeed!
Still - there are guys posting artticles on this site such as Sam Blackburn and Michael Dunn who leave me for dead. I'm still learning (aren't we all?) and it is so cool having you all here, contributing and teaching, so that we can all become the programmers we want to be
|
|
|
|
|
ATL is great for COM object development, but I'd hate to do any large scale UI using it. The wizards aren't as good, the classes are less flushed out (hence they are lighter).
I'd love it if ATL were a good UI platform, but so far I'd have to say that I can write my UI code far quicker using MFC.
|
|
|
|
|
Look into the WTL windowing extension to ATL released on the most recent platform SDK. It's no longer true that MFC has an advantage in a) function b) form. And just forget about image/size performance: WTL wins hands down over MFC - no external library load and it's open source. So? MFC... Nope - not here. Not ever again
|
|
|
|
|
WTL is undocumented, and is not likely to be supported....actually it was never supposed to be released. While it might be the solution to some of the problems with MFC, I'll go with something thats going to be supported so that I can hire people who actually know a thing or two about it rather than something that wasn't supposed to be released....
|
|
|
|
|
i hate MFC. it's so annoying
|
|
|
|
|
You're so specific, how could I possibly refute your statments?
I feel *compelled* to say "I LOVE MFC!"
Take that ;
|
|
|
|
|
I've heard MFC be called many things over the year, both good and bad, but "annoying" is a new one
You should check out the discussion between Eddie Velasquez and Joo in the Visual Studio Next Generation news item.
|
|
|
|
|
Spoken like true coder. You don't understand it therefore ist bad. Just go out and write
something better and we will all use it. Till then switch over to Win32 and don't use MFC.
No one is forcing you
|
|
|
|
|
The only thing I truly hate is boring and irrelevant discussion like yours
|
|
|
|
|
Like Yours? What the he*l are you talking about. If you want to offer an actual, valuable comment then go for it, otherwise clam up!
Gran
|
|
|
|
|
First, too many "C++" programmers have learned how to program using MFC as an example. Not that I'm dissing MFC, but I think we all agree it's not the world's best example of OO programming.
Second, ATL in its current incarnation doesn't provide an application development framework. It's great for components, but just doesn't have enough meat for apps. Maybe with WTL (which Microsoft has now claimed was a big mistake and is erasing 1984-style), Chris Sells' Attila, or another framework, we'd have something to go on, but I'm not hopeful for widespread adoption.
Third, we'd have to find some way to teach the masses of existing C++ developers to think beyond MFC and somehow get them to understand templates and MI, which I think will also be a reach. A "killer" solution will have to be simpler, not more complex.
Lastly, the whole world is heading in a different direction. The world is going ASP+, Web interfaces, XML, SOAP, etc. Using ATL to develop old-style monolitic apps is probably not the way to be thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
I was waiting for someone to say "WTL!" or "Attila!"
|
|
|
|
|
What is "Attila"? A new framework?
Any infos available?
|
|
|
|
|
It is a framework akin to WTL - for info on Attila, see http://www.sellsbrothers.com/attila
And it looks like there is hope for WTL yet...from the Attila mailing list
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Sells [mailto:csells@develop.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 3:35 PM
To: Attila Hit Squad
Subject: RE: The death of WTL?
I have made some progress in trying to talk MS into releasing WTL to DevelopMentor so that we can get it out to the world permanently
|
|
|
|
|
It gets better than that even.
From the ATL Listserv:
> From: Nenad Stefanovic [mailto:nenads@MICROSOFT.COM]
> Sent: Friday, May 05, 2000 5:39 PM
> To: ATL@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
> Subject: Re: WTL
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> The truth is that WTL is not part of the Visual C++ now. There are no
> changes to its status in the Platform SDK - it will continue
> to ship, and
> the new version will be available. I don't know why is Tony
> saying what he
> said, maybe you can ask him.
>
> Thanks,
> Nenad
|
|
|
|
|
|
Found on Google on the "Chris Sell Attila" search:
http://www.sellsbrothers.com/attila/.
From the site:
"Attila stands for "ATL for Applications." Attila is a set of extensions built on top of ATL to provide application-level services in the same flavor as MFC.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
