• 0

[ANY] A C++ porgram without .NET FW v2.0?


Question

Hey,

I want to make a program without having .NET Framework v2.0 installed, can it be done with C++ (or with any other language? Because have to have .NET Framework v2.0 installed is a very big problem.

Thanks :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Yeah you can make a C++ program without the .NET framework installed. Just use Visual Studio 6. Anything above is the .NET versions . . . I think.

You don't have to use the .NET framework in VS.NET for C++, you can easily do MFC or the like. Although then VS.NET might be overkill for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Yeah you can make a C++ program without the .NET framework installed. Just use Visual Studio 6. Anything above is the .NET versions . . . I think.

Yea, but I coded half of my program in VB .net 2005, but I want it to save down without .NET framework, so any user can open it without framework installed.

I know VB .net doesn't have that option but does Visual C++ 2005 Express Beta have that option, because I don't want to learn C++ to find out its all for nothing, and I should have stay with VB .net.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
You can code c++ for Win32 in VC++6, 2002, 2003, or 2005 IDEs. No MFC and no .NET. I do it all the time.

Cool!

Now how do I do that? :cry: (C++ is too big for me, I can't find anything :blink: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

The easiest way to do this would be to try and stick it into Visual Studio .NET 2002 or 2003. At least then most of your .NET stuff might still work. It may require some recoding, but the end file would only need the 1.1 version of the framework.

Also, isn't there a mode for compiling programs for backwards framework compatability? I know I can compile 2003 apps for the 1.0 version of the framework if I really want to....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Thats crazy, because I can't add a form or see or make a form :blink:

Welcome to the world of pre-framework (and pre-Framework) coding. In Win32 to create a window, you need to write a message pump for the window manually (drag and drop? Forget it), register the window class yourself, and call several API functions to get it to show up on the screen. Anywhere between 30 and 90 lines of code for an empty window, depending on your technique. After you've done that, you start adding things to the window (again, manually -- anywhere between 5 and 30 lines of code for each control, depending what it is).

I've actually written a complete (though small) application this way. Unless you're supporting every version of Windows for the last 10 years, or you have an absolute need not to ship even the smallest dependencies, or you're jonesing for the absolute fastest code you can write this side of assembler, stick with .NET or MFC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Welcome to the world of pre-framework (and pre-Framework) coding. In Win32 to create a window, you need to write a message pump for the window manually (drag and drop? Forget it), register the window class yourself, and call several API functions to get it to show up on the screen. Anywhere between 30 and 90 lines of code for an empty window, depending on your technique. After you've done that, you start adding things to the window (again, manually -- anywhere between 5 and 30 lines of code for each control, depending what it is).

:blink:

/me starts backing away looking frighten.... :blink: :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

PWND.

That's why I've never gone bigtime into Windows app coding until .NET. I've done a bunch of applications for Windows in C++, but that time MFC was only in version 1.0 and not really known, so I was severely annoyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

If you use dialogs (and use DialogBox), you can make a "simple" window in only a few lines of code. I don't see much reason for ever manually creating controls using CreateWindowEx and co.

You'll find that the amount of win32 code vs. mfc code is about the same. You save little space with mfc and need to redist. the mfc dll. The only benifit is the object oriented design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
If you use dialogs (and use DialogBox), you can make a "simple" window in only a few lines of code. I don't see much reason for ever manually creating controls using CreateWindowEx and co.

Yeah, you can use the dialog editor. All that does is remove the need for CreateWindowEx calls. You still need to register the window class, still need to set up the message loop yourself (those two represent the bulk of the work, and MFC does both for you). The amount of coding actually saved using the dialog editor is minimal (though it does cut down on the guess-and-test you have to go through when placing controls).

In any case, I much prefer:

Form myForm = new Form();
myForm.Text = "Hello";
myForm.Show();

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Using DialogBox does not require you to use a message loop (GetMessage/TranslateMessage/DispatchMessage) or register any window classes:

DialogBox(hInstance, MAKEINTRESOURCE(IDD_DIALOG), NULL, DialogProc);

Using CreateWindowEx also requires you to specify window procedures for each control you create. You would generally have to subclass each window. Further, using dialogs auto-enables the use of tabs and some other things that would require extra use code if not using dialogs.

So imo, using dialogs vs. CreateWindowEx saves quite a bit of code.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

That's great, but... this thread is about Managed apps without the .NET Framework. My post about Win32 coding was a comparison between old Win32 style programming and .NET for the benefit of someone who had never done the former, not really the beginning of a debate on the utility of the dialog editor. Back on topic now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.