DirectX 9.0 SDK December 2004 Update

#1 BIG NOTE: It does NOT support Visual C++ 6. Not even a little bit.

#2 Silly microsoft

#3

Quote: It does NOT support Visual C++ 6

I develop on VC6...

If this is true, yet another reason to stick with open standards... I haven't even thought of D3D in a few years...

-Josh

PS: Firefox hit 10 million downloads...

#4 I hate to break it to you guys, but VC6 sucks.

It's C++ support is pretty pathetic compared to every other compiler out there. I don't understand in the least why people support it. It's project management is poor, it's IDE is poor, it's file formats are obscure (compared to the XML formats in .NET), the compiler itself is stuck in the dark ages of C++. Some of the template stuff we are working on here will not compile with VC6, I really can't figure out why people hang on to this POS. Do yourselves a favor, grab .NET and Visual Assist X. It will literally boost your productivity by at least 5% I'd say.

As far as the open standards go...some of us really don't like trying to create Makefiles. It's way easier to right click on the project file and add a Pre-Build step, and have it work.

#5 I use VC6... I can't afford .net at the moment.

#6 Josh, I think you have it backwards. VC6 is an ancient pile of dung. It is no longer supported. Why should they continue to support products being used with an unsupported product?

New python modules come out that don't support old versions of python. This is exactly the same thing.

Pat has already given a nice list of reasons why people should be thrilled to have another reason to flee VC6, so I won't beat that horse.

I'm just hoping this will be enough to convince management where I work that VC6 has to go.

#7 I don't have it backwards... I don't work directly with the DirectX SDK... so I don't care if it doesn't support VC6...

I use Visual Assist X, it supports VC6... works great...

I meant open standards/cross platform standards like OpenGL... not sure where the makefiles come in...

Otherwise, I don't own .NET... and I won't be BUYING it, unless something forces me too... so far so good...

One day, VC6 won't be what I use... not today... is .NET a better product, compiler, whatever... sure...
-Josh

#8 Visual C++ .Net 2003 is only $109 USD directly from Microsoft. If you shop around you can probably find it for less.

#9 Hm... that's significantly cheaper than I thought... I like VC6... I've written a lot of code with it... *I* wouldn't get any direct benefit from .NET this afternoon... if Visual Assist X didn't support VC6, I would be buying .NET 2003 today... as it is, I am not using templates and don't have a reason to switch right now...

Can I see that other's do... of course...

-J

#10 If this is true, yet another reason to stick with open standards
The fact that VC6 is no longer supported by Microsoft has nothing to do with OpenGL vs. DirectX.

People who do insist on sticking with VC6 and using DX can use a slightly older version.

People who use old versions of Python can't use the latest python modules. Same thing.

Cling to old tools == can't use new toys.

#11 .Net 2003 is better in MANY ways. And Visual Assist works with it very nciely.

You can try out .Net 2005 for free. It's far ahead of 2003 as well. People who are considering upgrading may want to wait for it to ship.

#12 How does the VC6 incompatibility affect OTHER, non-microsoft compilers? What is the incompatibility introduced?

-J

#13 The first issue is that their use of C++ is no longer held back by the limitations of the VC6 compiler. Any compiler that reasonably follows the standard should have no issue with this.

Additional security features have been added. The information that would be required to support this has been released. I don't know if any other compilers have taken advantage of it at this time. This info could also be used to hack around the lack of VC6 support. But obviously this would be unsupported and more effort than it's worth.

#14

Quote:Visual C++ .Net 2003 is only $109 USD directly from Microsoft.

Sure, for the standard edition. Going to a non-optimized compiler would be a downgrade for me. I'd need to plunk down $1,000 for the optimizing professional edition.

I'll stick with my handy VC6 for the time being. It suits my needs just fine. If/when I need something that compiles templates well (The one area VC6 is famously weak at) then I'll probably switch to GCC.

#15 Cool... though, I am not spending $1000 for the optimizing version... not until I have to switch compilers for a tangible reason... for OUR development...

Still using VC6 + Visual Assist X (at least on Windows)... and getting back to it :)

-Josh

#16 If you already have VC6 Pro or better, the upgrade is $549.00. For anyone who really needs it, it's a small price to pay.

I'm not sure why people have latched on to templates like it's the only reason anyone would want to upgrade.

#17 Writing with the DirectX SDK requires a $1000 compiler for every programmer on your team... and your code is windows only... it has everything to do with open standards...

This is a reason why cross-platform game engines like Torque are better to use than leveraging platform poop... hrm... how does this affect TSE actually? Does it only compile with .NET 2003 or higher?

It has nothing to do with Microsoft supporting VC6... you are right there...

-J

#18 Pffft. $550 is still more than I'm willing to pay when I already have a compiler that works.

Templates are brought up a lot 'cause it was the one thing everyone knew sucked even when VC6 was new. People have been ribbing MS about template support for so long that the fact they've finally gotten it right is somewhat noteworthy.

#19 Writing with the DirectX SDK requires a $1000 compiler for every programmer on your team
No. As I pointed out, it doesn't.

People have been ribbing MS about template support for so long that the fact they've finally gotten it right is somewhat noteworthy.
I agree that it is noteworthy. My point is that they fixed a lot of other things that desperately needed it as well.

#20 Are there any differences between the end build (in terms of data inside it and how it's compiled) between VC6 and the newer NET 2003?