Design Question: When use Win32 and when MFC?
-
Using Win32 has high performance but takes more development time. MFC has low performance but development time is less. Am I right and any more pros & cons
-
Using Win32 has high performance but takes more development time. MFC has low performance but development time is less. Am I right and any more pros & cons
If you turn off GUI features MFC also gets as fast as Win32. If you really need performance you write a worker thread without GUI. The signifikant time is for me the development time. :-O My bosses want almost the new features running next week. :mad:
Greetings from Germany
-
Using Win32 has high performance but takes more development time. MFC has low performance but development time is less. Am I right and any more pros & cons
mandanani wrote:
MFC has low performance
Why do you need performance ? Is it so relevant that you need to consider it ? Are you developping some 'time-critical' application ? If no, why do you bother about performance ? Do you think the user will notice that your project takes 100 msec more to start ?
Cédric Moonen Software developer
Charting control [v1.2] -
If you turn off GUI features MFC also gets as fast as Win32. If you really need performance you write a worker thread without GUI. The signifikant time is for me the development time. :-O My bosses want almost the new features running next week. :mad:
Greetings from Germany
-
Using Win32 has high performance but takes more development time. MFC has low performance but development time is less. Am I right and any more pros & cons
mandanani wrote:
MFC has low performance
Rubbish.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
mandanani wrote:
MFC has low performance
Why do you need performance ? Is it so relevant that you need to consider it ? Are you developping some 'time-critical' application ? If no, why do you bother about performance ? Do you think the user will notice that your project takes 100 msec more to start ?
Cédric Moonen Software developer
Charting control [v1.2]Please ask the questions like this. I Always go for performance. If i am creating the application which takes time 2 second to execute i will always try to minimize the time to even less than a quarter of a second.
Anurag Gandhi. http://www.softgandhi.co.nr
-
Using Win32 has high performance but takes more development time. MFC has low performance but development time is less. Am I right and any more pros & cons
-
Using Win32 has high performance but takes more development time. MFC has low performance but development time is less. Am I right and any more pros & cons
mandanani wrote:
MFC has low performance but development time is less
In most cases saving development time is the best option (and software reliability is even more valuable). Moreover, IMHO, performace differences between MFC and WIN32 API are almost irrelevant for the average software developer (like me: I usually have to look for better designs and algorithms to improve the overall performance). That said, I think that MFC is a good class library but you need to use it only if fits your needs, in other words, if you don't like the Framework, WIN32 API is an option. :-D
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
-
If you turn off GUI features MFC also gets as fast as Win32. If you really need performance you write a worker thread without GUI. The signifikant time is for me the development time. :-O My bosses want almost the new features running next week. :mad:
Greetings from Germany
KarstenK wrote:
If you really need performance you write a worker thread...
:laugh: It's amazing how many folks think more threads equates to better performance.
"A good athlete is the result of a good and worthy opponent." - David Crow
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
mandanani wrote:
MFC has low performance
Rubbish.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
Please ask the questions like this. I Always go for performance. If i am creating the application which takes time 2 second to execute i will always try to minimize the time to even less than a quarter of a second.
Anurag Gandhi. http://www.softgandhi.co.nr
So, to reduce the launching time of your application from 2 seconds to 1 second, you'll be ready to spend twice as much time for development ? Honnestly, it is a complete nonsense to me. And furthermore, your application will probably be much harder to maintain. For a 'normal' application (I mean a standard desktop application), why do you even speak about performance ?
Cédric Moonen Software developer
Charting control [v1.2] -
mandanani wrote:
MFC has low performance
Rubbish.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
Rubbish.
Finally, a rational post to this thread :)
Mark Salsbery Microsoft MVP - Visual C++ :java:
-
Using Win32 has high performance but takes more development time. MFC has low performance but development time is less. Am I right and any more pros & cons
mandanani wrote:
Using Win32 has high performance...MFC has low performance
What exactly do you think MFC uses? Which part of MFC have you seen give worse performance than straight Win32 calls? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but when I see this statement I want proof. Most of the time it's just parroting what some uninformed peer has stated. I'm calling B.S. Mark
Mark Salsbery Microsoft MVP - Visual C++ :java:
-
Using Win32 has high performance but takes more development time. MFC has low performance but development time is less. Am I right and any more pros & cons
As best I can tell, MFC is nothing but a convoluted "object-oriented" wrapper around the Win32SDK. My opinion is that object-orientation often serves to obfuscate functionality, hinder maintenance, and it certainly cannot improve performance any. If you look at the binary for a windows executable you'll see win32 sdk calls, not MFC. So for personal projects, why add another layer you have to learn which doesn't actually add anything. It is worth noting that GDI+ is offered in its standard "object-oriented" guise as well as in a flat api. The same is true of the FreeImage Graphics Library. The Cairo graphics library, (which I highly recommend, BTW, along with FreeImage) is strictly a flat api and a model of lucidity. The web browser Mozilla uses Cairo instead of GDI+.
-
As best I can tell, MFC is nothing but a convoluted "object-oriented" wrapper around the Win32SDK. My opinion is that object-orientation often serves to obfuscate functionality, hinder maintenance, and it certainly cannot improve performance any. If you look at the binary for a windows executable you'll see win32 sdk calls, not MFC. So for personal projects, why add another layer you have to learn which doesn't actually add anything. It is worth noting that GDI+ is offered in its standard "object-oriented" guise as well as in a flat api. The same is true of the FreeImage Graphics Library. The Cairo graphics library, (which I highly recommend, BTW, along with FreeImage) is strictly a flat api and a model of lucidity. The web browser Mozilla uses Cairo instead of GDI+.
seem like folks had misunderstood me. I prefer to develop a project with MFC until and unless my boss compels. In fact bosses doesn't know basics of any languange. ;P This is just a question came to mind, and thought of getting all your valuable views :) But MFC adds extra layer over Win32 and will have less (may be negligible to many:-D) performance to Win32. With MFC application can be written in fly ::cool: Bottom-line those who love ooops prefer to use MFC and those traditional C programmers prefer Win32.
