VS.NET: Compartible with MFC6?
-
I got a lil problem here. I have several projects built with Visual Studio 6. Recently switched to Visual Studio.NET and found that it compiles/linkages all projects using MFC7 dlls. Of course it is not working on OS that doesn't have .NET framework installed. And this is not a good point. So my question is: is it still possible to use MFC6 in Visual Studio .NET and how to do that? I even created a simple Test application with MFC, and tried it on Windows 98... "Get me MFC7 now!" it said :( I hope there is some way to do that, otherwise I'll have to bring the VS.NET back to store, no use of it then :( Philip Patrick Web-site: www.stpworks.com "Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
-
I got a lil problem here. I have several projects built with Visual Studio 6. Recently switched to Visual Studio.NET and found that it compiles/linkages all projects using MFC7 dlls. Of course it is not working on OS that doesn't have .NET framework installed. And this is not a good point. So my question is: is it still possible to use MFC6 in Visual Studio .NET and how to do that? I even created a simple Test application with MFC, and tried it on Windows 98... "Get me MFC7 now!" it said :( I hope there is some way to do that, otherwise I'll have to bring the VS.NET back to store, no use of it then :( Philip Patrick Web-site: www.stpworks.com "Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
MFC 7 works perfectly fine without the .NET runtime installed... - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
I got a lil problem here. I have several projects built with Visual Studio 6. Recently switched to Visual Studio.NET and found that it compiles/linkages all projects using MFC7 dlls. Of course it is not working on OS that doesn't have .NET framework installed. And this is not a good point. So my question is: is it still possible to use MFC6 in Visual Studio .NET and how to do that? I even created a simple Test application with MFC, and tried it on Windows 98... "Get me MFC7 now!" it said :( I hope there is some way to do that, otherwise I'll have to bring the VS.NET back to store, no use of it then :( Philip Patrick Web-site: www.stpworks.com "Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
Philip Patrick wrote: is it still possible to use MFC6 in Visual Studio .NET No, VS.NET comes with MFC 7 and that's what it uses. I'm an advocate of linking MFC and CRT statically so you never have to worry about the MFC DLLs. MFC7 does not use or require the .NET framework. --Mike-- Just released - RightClick-Encrypt v1.4 - Adds fast & easy file encryption to Explorer My really out-of-date homepage Sonork-100.19012 Acid_Helm
-
I got a lil problem here. I have several projects built with Visual Studio 6. Recently switched to Visual Studio.NET and found that it compiles/linkages all projects using MFC7 dlls. Of course it is not working on OS that doesn't have .NET framework installed. And this is not a good point. So my question is: is it still possible to use MFC6 in Visual Studio .NET and how to do that? I even created a simple Test application with MFC, and tried it on Windows 98... "Get me MFC7 now!" it said :( I hope there is some way to do that, otherwise I'll have to bring the VS.NET back to store, no use of it then :( Philip Patrick Web-site: www.stpworks.com "Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
.NET framework is not needed. You need to distribute MFC7 dll files with your app. See informations about redistributable files in MSDN. Pavel Sonork 100.15206
-
.NET framework is not needed. You need to distribute MFC7 dll files with your app. See informations about redistributable files in MSDN. Pavel Sonork 100.15206
Yeah, thanx. Looked around, read some MSDN help that comes with VS.NET... Well redistributing MFC7 is better than the whole .NET framework, although it takes like 4Mb :( *sighs* Philip Patrick Web-site: www.stpworks.com "Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
-
Yeah, thanx. Looked around, read some MSDN help that comes with VS.NET... Well redistributing MFC7 is better than the whole .NET framework, although it takes like 4Mb :( *sighs* Philip Patrick Web-site: www.stpworks.com "Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
Philip Patrick wrote: thanx My pleasure. Philip Patrick wrote: Well redistributing MFC7 is better than the whole .NET framework MFC libraries have nothing in common with .NET Framework except that MFC7 is part of VS.NET studio. MFC is classic unmanaged C++ library. .NET is from another world. Pavel Sonork 100.15206
-
.NET framework is not needed. You need to distribute MFC7 dll files with your app. See informations about redistributable files in MSDN. Pavel Sonork 100.15206
I have not used VC7 yet. If the .NET framework is not required for programs written with VC7, then what is .NET framework for?
-
I have not used VC7 yet. If the .NET framework is not required for programs written with VC7, then what is .NET framework for?
You can write programs of two kinds using VC++ 7, unmanaged and managed. Unmanaged programs are using WIN32 API and optionally some libraries like MFC or ATL, nothing from .NET, it's the same programming as in previous versions with new IDE and some new features in libraries and compiler. Managed ones are interfacing with .NET framework using MS specific language extensions. .NET framework is an environment very similar to Java with bytecode(called MSIL here), garbage collector, objects and interfaces, rich libraries, see this[^]. Pavel Sonork 100.15206
-
Philip Patrick wrote: is it still possible to use MFC6 in Visual Studio .NET No, VS.NET comes with MFC 7 and that's what it uses. I'm an advocate of linking MFC and CRT statically so you never have to worry about the MFC DLLs. MFC7 does not use or require the .NET framework. --Mike-- Just released - RightClick-Encrypt v1.4 - Adds fast & easy file encryption to Explorer My really out-of-date homepage Sonork-100.19012 Acid_Helm
Michael Dunn wrote: I'm an advocate of linking MFC and CRT statically so you never have to worry about the MFC DLLs. But doesn't it eat up all your memory if you have more than one of this kind of programs? Mustafa Demirhan http://www.macroangel.com Sonork ID 100.9935:zoltrix
They say I'm lazy but it takes all my time
-
Michael Dunn wrote: I'm an advocate of linking MFC and CRT statically so you never have to worry about the MFC DLLs. But doesn't it eat up all your memory if you have more than one of this kind of programs? Mustafa Demirhan http://www.macroangel.com Sonork ID 100.9935:zoltrix
They say I'm lazy but it takes all my time
You're blowing things way out of proportion. It doesn't use "all" your memory. Each executable image will be larger, however that is preferable to having to debug screwy problems caused by different DLL versions, which will appear to be your fault because, hey, your program is crashing. --Mike-- Just released - RightClick-Encrypt v1.4 - Adds fast & easy file encryption to Explorer My really out-of-date homepage Sonork-100.19012 Acid_Helm
-
You're blowing things way out of proportion. It doesn't use "all" your memory. Each executable image will be larger, however that is preferable to having to debug screwy problems caused by different DLL versions, which will appear to be your fault because, hey, your program is crashing. --Mike-- Just released - RightClick-Encrypt v1.4 - Adds fast & easy file encryption to Explorer My really out-of-date homepage Sonork-100.19012 Acid_Helm
Michael Dunn wrote: You're blowing things way out of proportion. Hehe. Ok. Sorry for that :rolleyes: Michael Dunn wrote: that is preferable to having to debug screwy problems caused by different DLL versions, which will appear to be your fault because, hey, your program is crashing. Sure, but there is always a trade-off :rolleyes: Mustafa Demirhan http://www.macroangel.com Sonork ID 100.9935:zoltrix
They say I'm lazy but it takes all my time