Borland C++ Builder vs. Micro$oft Visual C++

[Hacktarux]

The problem I see with using Gnu C++ is how the hell do you make windows based programs? It's not worth the frustration to build them by hand, even if you are using libraries, IMO.

It depends... Are u planning to write you program using the specific libraries provided by the compiler ? For example if you use vc++, will you use MFC and make your binary mfc dll dependant ? If the answer is no, gcc won't change much to your problem because vc++ is only writing the ressource file, then you'll have to write the code around. you can even use lcc to write your ressource files automatically...

Anyway before thinking about the gui, you need to have a working core. To achieve this you may need a few full rewrite of your code so i think you should focus on learning how to program the core of your emulator. Once it'll be done, i think you'll know enough to write a gui easily

Oh and to answer your initial question about asm, imo, using asm in an emulator isn't required at all unless you write a dynarec:
- if you're emulating an old system, your emulator is fast enough, asm is useless..
- if you're emulating a new system, your emulator is too slow and it'll still be if you make some asm optimizations here and there. Only solution is to write a dynarec which involve obviously writing asm code.

 

[Cyberman]

Ok a few things I've posted this a few times but I think people don't listen.

Cygwin
MingW
DevC++

All work for the Windows OS these are the windows GCC libraries and compilors.

GCC compiles for a number of platforms and processors, in fact all new processors use this to get an initial compilor working for it.
In fact the only part you need to change on the compilor are two parts they are the back end.

You also need to port GAS to the processor but that's not terribly difficult.

One is the processor model assertion this can take a lot of work to do but compile it and you can get your backend assembly code generated in no time. The optimizer requires assembly level optimization pairs be used and this is optional.

GCC is provides more stable and better code than most other compilors, since much of the optimization is done by contributers if they only do 'enough' for there needs, it's not all too likely others will continue there work (though it's possible such as ARM and PPC and X86).

The real difference is librarys.. whats included with BCB and VC++ are lots of library material that doesn't require you to write wrappers for DLL functions or loading DLL's etc. So.. that is really the difference.

Cyb

 

[nephalim]

The real difference is librarys.. whats included with BCB and VC++ are lots of library material that doesn't require you to write wrappers for DLL functions or loading DLL's etc. So.. that is really the difference.

Interface too! A sort of "spell check" for programming is awesome, makes life much easier :satisfied

The making of a GUI for windows is much easier in either of those programs also, in fact in most cases actual programming isn't even necessary!

 

[ingonab]

Which IDE has the best visual tool for hacking up standard GUIs very quicky? I use VC++ 6 for all my Windows programming but its GUI hacking tools feels dated and poor.

In terms of a GUI creation WYSIWIG, the nicest I've tried so far is Apple's InterfaceBuilder that comes with Mac OS X. (It has snap-to guiding lines that pop up whenever you're placing/moving a control to ensure that it's correctly spaced from, and aligned with, other controls and the window borders. --Which means I get professional looking UIs without having to muck about with spacing controls.) :sleeping: Unfortunately, it's not Mac OS X I want to develop for. :down:

 

[Slougi]

One problem with the Windows GUI builders is that the results you get usually resize very very poorly. Compare that to some GTK stuff built with Glade or something similar, which resizes in a much nicer fashion.

 

[Malcolm]

err...


School: VC++
Home:
....Linux: Anjuta IDE + GCC
....Windows: VC++ or DevCpp depending on what I'm doing


My comments stop here





















no wait, here

 

[new_profile]

One problem with the Windows GUI builders is that the results you get usually resize very very poorly. Compare that to some GTK stuff built with Glade or something similar, which resizes in a much nicer fashion.

I think that there is a port of the Gimp toolkit to windows.
Why not using Qt from TrollTech ? It provide a really good GUI designer.

 

[Slougi]

I think that there is a port of the Gimp toolkit to windows.
Why not using Qt from TrollTech ? It provide a really good GUI designer.

The main problem with QT is that it is free only on Linux. And yes, GTK is ported to windows, but all it's tools are *nix only

 

[Hacktarux]

afaik glade is available for windows

 

[David_Hayter]

Humm..

If ya wanna make an easy gui in a quick-easy-not-optimized way, then delphi or basic is the way to go, for somthin else like pro games and real stuff, then visual studio is just the best round, and most ppl hate it because "microshit sucks,bla,bla,bla" and ya know how it is

 

[SculleatR]

I Compared Visual C++ and BCB TODAY...

I Really saw Visual C++ IS Better than BCB in important
parts.... like code editor, optimizations etc...
When BCB's binaries use speed optimizations they are equal
in speed with VC++'s binaries without speed optimizations.

= BCB's binaries are slower.

I think I switch to VC++.
Hack: You are right :blush:

Maybe I get Visual Studio .NET 2003 Enterprise Architect.

 

[Xeven]

Regarding the question, i would recommend VC++ against Borland. The IDE and debugger in VC++ is excellent and Borland is generally outdated. Just make a note that its sometimes wise to avoid compiler specific constructs and stick with ANSI. The fastest compiler i've found so far is Intel C++, the only problem with it is that its x86 specific. If you're hellbent on making your emu "portable" g++ would be really good for you but is probably not a requirement. You can just as easily write your emu in portable code with the gui written in an uportable one. Yes like MFC, which a lot of people dont really like, but i use generally because im lazy. :happy: And as a last note, no matter what compiler you choose or whatever development environment you buy, dont expect them to do everything for you. Nothing beats human intuition.