Re: From VC6 to .NET 2 questions

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

> You seem to be confused. ".NET" is not the opposite of "MFC", and for
> some reason or
> other a lot of people seem to be very confused about this point. MFC is
> MFC, and MFC has
> several incarnations, from 16-bit MFC through VS 2005, but it is still
> MFC. So this is
> still the newsgroup for all versions of MFC in all operating environments.

I am not confusing anything. I was looking at a NG to help me convert my
app.
I have a project that was created with VC6 and I want to move to .NET.
I wanted to know the benefits of such a move and/or to know if it would
totally break my application.

> Yes, the executables will require new DLLs. That's what installers worry
> about, packaging
> up all the correct components. So if you abandon any idea that copy ==
> install, which has
> not been true for about a dozen years, then there is no issue to be
> addressed.

No, that what I will worry about.
My projects require that I am in control of my applications, not some magic
fairy.

I _never_ said anything about copy=install. Thanks for the cheap shot.

>
> The compiler is a lot more stringent, some types have been redefined to
> cause compilation
> errors when misused, and when used in debug mode, the environment is a lot
> more meticulous
> about certain runtime checks as well. So there is a chance that previous
> errors will be
> detected. Note also that you can also make sure you have not made some
> serious blunder
> like assuming that DWORD, int, UINT, and similar 32-bit integer types are
> fully
> interchangeable with pointers (they no longer are if you are in Win64, and
> the compiler
> will complain).
> joe

Thanks

Simon


.

Quantcast