please wait
Becoming programmer after 40 years.
Feb 5, 2010 at 10:18pmclosed account (j3bk4iN6)
Also I think being an entrepenuer is cool, because I like to think I could develop something on my own that would sell. Thats why I'm jumping into MFC next, because I wanna learn how to make windows enviroment applications, instead of just running things in the command line.
Last edited on Feb 5, 2010 at 10:22pm
Feb 5, 2010 at 10:42pmclosed account (j3bk4iN6)
Also the very biggest thing I had to learn is that the only one you have to convince is yourself. I tried to go into school and show all these cool things I did, and because I didn't recieve a response doesn't mean I have to prove to somebody else what my capabilities are. I mean besides passing the class, you get what you put in.
Another thing is most people can't handle staring at a screen for 24 hours straight. I notice this does crazy stuff with my brain. So, when I go to the grocery store or something I see the equivalent of machine language fluttering in front of my eyes.
Another thing is most people can't handle staring at a screen for 24 hours straight. I notice this does crazy stuff with my brain. So, when I go to the grocery store or something I see the equivalent of machine language fluttering in front of my eyes.
Last edited on Feb 5, 2010 at 10:54pm
Feb 5, 2010 at 11:15pm| Thats why I'm jumping into MFC next |
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
not another one!
Feb 5, 2010 at 11:43pmclosed account (j3bk4iN6)
are you an MFC enficionodo or do you hate answering questions about the MFC. Do you think its beyond my scope?
Feb 5, 2010 at 11:46pm
I just don't like managed code. If you want managed code, use C#... then again, C# sucks, so just stick to native code :l
C++ shouldn't be mixed with JIT compiling. They just don't go together... C++ is supposed to be native. C was created to be like a portable assembly language (because each assembly language only works on the architecture it was made for); not for JIT compiling. Java is better for that.
C++ shouldn't be mixed with JIT compiling. They just don't go together... C++ is supposed to be native. C was created to be like a portable assembly language (because each assembly language only works on the architecture it was made for); not for JIT compiling. Java is better for that.
Last edited on Feb 5, 2010 at 11:48pm
Feb 5, 2010 at 11:48pmclosed account (j3bk4iN6)
Oh I see....then can you create a window using just windows API. I want to be able to create fields where you can enter in values. Like a Gui windows. So java is better at doing this, why is visual studio said to be able to create windows applications.
Last edited on Feb 5, 2010 at 11:52pm
Feb 5, 2010 at 11:51pm
Yes, you can. Or, better yet, you can use a cross-platform GUI library like Qt or Wx or GTK+.
I don't mean to put you down, but in my (somewhat uneducated) opinion, managed code is worthless and lazy.
I don't mean to put you down, but in my (somewhat uneducated) opinion, managed code is worthless and lazy.
Feb 5, 2010 at 11:59pm
i'm not sure about what i'm going to say but is GTK+ and Wx are also managed code? please clear this up for me..
Feb 6, 2010 at 12:39am
They are written in C. That's a fact. They could be written in .NET.
Feb 6, 2010 at 1:32am
ok last question helios, how did it became cross platform? how is it possible? for example java is cross platform because it runs on a virtual machine.. does GTK+ and wxWidget runs on a virtual machine.. or they are compiled naturally for a target OS..
i'm also looking forward to QT but looks like it is not open source..
i'm also looking forward to QT but looks like it is not open source..
Feb 6, 2010 at 1:46am
i see. so it needs to be compiled on each platform you want to run.. that's just what i wanted.. maybe i'll read more about license issue on QT later.. i'll try GTK+ first..
~thanks helios
~thanks helios
Feb 6, 2010 at 12:43pm
i just started a hello world program in Qt.. it's very like java.. this is gonna be fun...
after reading some articles on the internet. it seems like there are two versions, commercial and open source under LGPL..
i did not understand the whole LGPL thing but it seems like developers using this license can't sell programs for commercially.. the developer is also oblige to show the source code
after reading some articles on the internet. it seems like there are two versions, commercial and open source under LGPL..
i did not understand the whole LGPL thing but it seems like developers using this license can't sell programs for commercially.. the developer is also oblige to show the source code