Related
I recently started C++. I am using PHP right now and decided to take a look at C++. Web programming had me working with a couple of languages, with a couple of people. I wanted to do programming where I only had to bother with one language and create small utility apps (mostly not web-based). I wanted a compiled, strongly-type language without memorizing a tome of classes. Basically I wanted to learn C++ for the following:
mobile programming (I don't ever want to go touching Java, and I don't have a Mac for Objective C or IPhone SDK)
small desktop apps like DTRs, POSs
creating small desktop-based games
creating small Air-like applications that can access the web for additional content
I heard that C++ is not beginner-friendly and is mostly used for huge projects with lots of calculations and fine details (like 3D games). Is it practical or even possible for me to use C++ for the above cases? (Sorry, I haven't delved on C++ that much yet, so aside from "huge, monolithic project", I don't know any other uses for it)
You can certainly use C++ in all the areas you mention, though whether it is best of breed for any of them is open to debate. C++ is very large and complex language, and requires a fair bit of effort to get up to speed on. If I were you, I would pick one of the areas you mention that you are most interested in, and then find out which language(s) are best suited for that area and learn that.
If you are set on learning C++ you will need to read at least one book on it - you cannot learn it from internet resources alone. See this question The Definitive C++ Book Guide and List for a book list.
On the droid you can use other languages aside from Java - check out their ASE (Active Scripting Environment). C++ / C should really only be used when you have no other choice - i.e. speed critical code, operating systems etc. It's very easy to make a mistake that's difficult to diagnose and there are lots of task where it'll take way longer than it should to write and odds are others have already done so and done it way better - reinventing the wheel is bad. If it interests you though by all means learn and eventually you may master it. It's an excellent skill to have.
It's also not a completely object oriented language however, it's a hybrid one that supports most object oriented features, but some such as inheritance and polymorphism are a bit awkward to deal with in C++ - for example you have to define methods as virtual in base classes in order to be allowed to redefine them in subclasses - sort of like predicting the future - will this method every be desired to be redefined by an inheritor? Really what happens in that case is you make the base class method virtual later on to enable it to be redefinable - that is if you happen to have access to the source code to do just that - if not then oh well. For an example of this confusing stuff in C++ and other gotchas: Pitfalls
Look at other languages such as Ruby or Python - in particular Stackless Python where a combination of it and C++ (used where necessary) was used to create EVE Online as well as the functional languages such Erlang and Haskell.
For 2, 3 and 4, I recommend C# over C++, for the reasons I wrote here.
About 1, you can do iPhone development with .NET but I've never tried it and I don't know how viable it is.
Edit
To answer your actual question: yes, it's totally practical to write small and large desktop apps in C++. Especially if you use quality tools like Visual Studio and Qt. It's just that I think it'd waste a lot of your time for no reason, unless you intend to go into professional game development eventually.
I went to C++ from PHP like you, but I was more interested in 3D games and such. Now I have moved on to C# and find it much more enjoyable than C++.
As for your specific areas of interest however, C++ is certainly an option but C# may be better.
Mobile programming with C++ is probably not a good idea. I know it's possible with NDKs and such but for a beginner it's probably not so good. For iPhone development, other than the official SDK, the next best option is the (commercial) MonoTouch framework from Novell. However, you may still need a mac to deploy (I don't know). In terms of Android, if you don't want to touch Java (don't blame you) I believe a C# framework (similar to MonoTouch) is in development and other languages may be available. Other platforms? No idea.
Small desktop apps is also very possible with C++. Assuming you're running Windows, you can use the Win32 API (pain) or the C++/CLI API (better). You could also use a different GUI framework like Qt, wxWidgets or GTK+ which are all also supported on other platforms. Again coming back to C#, GUI development using GTK# in MonoDevelop is so much fun. Having used WinForms in Visual C# Express back in my Windows days, I can say that I now enjoy the process whereas I didn't before.
Games are my main area of interest and the reason I originally picked up C++. Seeing as you've said small and desktop-based, using C++ for performance reasons is way overkill IMO. You could make a decent, fun, playable game in Python using pygame without the pain of using a language like C++. In C# (yes, I'm trying to sell it to you) you could create awesome games using the XNA framework from Microsoft or other frameworks like (my personal favorite) OpenTK.
Rich internet applications. C++ is probably not the right tool to use here. It's certainly possible but seeing as C++ has no standard networking library, you would have to figure some of this stuff out yourself. C# may not be the right tool either but it makes it a little easier. There are other options as well (like Python) but it's not something I know much about.
Despite what I've said about it, I still think C++ is a good language to learn. It teaches you about lower-level things you never think about in PHP land. If you want to learn it, the book that really helped me was "C++: A beginners guide" by Herbert Schildt and also "Programming" by Bjarne Stroustrup.
Yes, your use cases can all be done with C++, more or less (YMMV on mobile devices).
To some degree or another, a language like C# will be more rapid to develop in, however.
In my opinion, once you get away from the straight-up form design features and hack for a while in a language & application, language feature comparisons begin to diminish in meaningfulness.
I recommend C++ as a first "heavyweight" language; see here for my most recent discussion on it.
Being a C#/Java programmer, I really need to know a fact: Has Windows Programming with Win32SDK/MFC/wxWidget become antiquated?
What is the status of popularity of these technologies in software industry now?
Being a C#/Java programmer, do I need to learn Win32SDK/MFC/wxWidget now?
I think that learning the Win32 SDK is useful because it helps you understand how Windows works internally. I found learning about hooks and subclassing very fascinating. So if it interests you then you should go for it. However, you probably don't need to know Win32. It's not yet antiquated today but it may be in the future.
I never had much interest in MFC because it requires the paid version of Visual Studio.
Yes, learn Win32, even if don't ever intend to write or maintain C/C++ apps.
No, don't bother learning MFC/wxWidget now. MFC does come with its source code, so you can study how some classes implement wrappers for Win32, but that is more interesting to C++ programmers. MFC is has decreased in popularity, though Visual Studio continues to support this older tech. Learn MFC/wxWidget only for an as-needed basis, if you need to maintain some older code.
With C#/Java, you can solve a lot of problems, but there are times when you will need to use Win32 directly to achieve some task. for a variety of reasons. Maybe some functionality is simply missing from .NET/Java, or has a bug that can be avoided by going directly to Win32. Maybe your particular problem to solve has unusual or strict requirements, and you would consider writing a portion of your app in native code using some Win32 calls as necessary. Lots of examples/situations really.
Another reason to learn Win32 is that both .NET/Java are higher level abstractions (which is in itself a good thing), but it really does help to understand the internals for these reasons:
You get an appreciation of how much work .NET/Java do for you. Of course, you can do the same things in C/C++, but it takes a lot more work. Consider these two compelling .NET technologies, WPF and WCF, which do a lot work for you.
You will better understand resource management. Specifically, both .NET/Java are garbage collected environments, but you must deterministically release OS resources (explicitly calling Dispose), for such things as network connections, window handles, kernel objects, and plenty more. You should never rely on the garbage collector to release these objects for you, since the GC is non-deterministic.
Debugging, knowing the internals seriously helps here.
Knowing Win32 can sometimes help explain the API design in .NET at least. Some parts of the .NET API are modeled on Win32 API, but some parts of the .NET API are extreme improvements over some truly heinous Win32 API designs (consider the API for using GDI for example).
Finally, knowing Win32 can help solve performance problems in your apps.
Win32 won't become antiquated, until the Microsoft's popular operating systems are based on something else. At one point, Microsoft was going to replace Win32/64 with .NET in Vista, but this didn't pan out. Even for whatever replaces Win32/64 is the future, you still need to understand the OS SDK. At the risk of sounding like a salesman, I will say that learning Win32 will in fact help you write more robust applications and will greatly aid your debugging skills, two important items to help you stay employed. I would never hire a windows programmer who doesn't have at least some experience with Win32.
I would suggest "Windows via C/C++" by Richter/Nasarre, as one example of a good book on Win32 (yes, it's obviously geared towards C/C++, but these authors do an excellent job explaining Win32).
Hope this helps.
I think Win32/64 SDK will never be antiquated, as drivers or other low level programs won't be written in .NET or Java because of the performance requirements. If you are going to develop in .NET, then MFC or wxWidget is useless for you.
I develop in .NET regularly, and sincerely, every program I've ever created in .NET called some Win32 API functions. So learning Win32/64 SDK isn't pointless, but is time-consuming.
I am an architect and I recommend that all new projects use newer technologies, like .NET or Java. The difference in productivity is tremendous, at least according to my own experience with C++ and .NET.
There are two exceptions:
- I work for a software company and we are bound by the requirements of our customer, usually including the programming environment. So, if a customer only has people knowing, say, MFC, we will make an MFC project. But this is becoming rarer and rarer. If we have the choice, we will go with .NET or Java.
- You have a team with expert people in these older technologies and they are quite productive with them.
There's plenty of work for people like you, so I'd advise not learning these for job purposes. We have some MFC apps, but that's partly because it's what we had and partly because we had more faith in C++ performance, and performance is very important for them.
I wouldn't call C++ or MFC antiquated, but there's relatively less new work in it. (I would very much like to never support another Win32 program, though.) The new C++ standard should be out in 200B, and people will continue to work on it, and Microsoft has been adding new classes to MFC, so obviously there's continued interest and continued work.
For professional development, I'd suggest you learn something different, but that would be something like Lisp or Haskell, rather than C++, and as far as I can tell there's no particular virtue in knowing MFC.
Realistically Microsoft forces business to use their latest and greatest technologies. There will always be work for someone who knows both technologies because someone has to port legacy code.
Many small devices (phones) or games require lighter solutions. If you intend to work in those areas you will definitely need those technologies.
You need to decide where you want to go. Once you have a map then you can lay in the right supplies for the journey.
I found Java horrendous to work with compared to Win32. Someone needs to cut about ninety percent of the inbuilt libraries.
I wouldn't call Win32 and such antiquated. As other people have said, it really depends on the app. As a game developer, I use Win32 less and DirectX a hell of a lot more. I could double or triple my Windows code, and it would still be an extremely small portion of the project.
However, if you're writing a primarily interface application with a relatively small and lightweight backend, .NET might well be a good choice for you.
As for Haskell, I just found that to be a truly terrible language in pretty much every respect. It seemed to me that it served some abstract mathematical definition of "functional", rather than a real definition of "programmable-in".
Win32 SDK is nowadays used in niche markets, where more modern technologies can't be used for some reasons (legacy Win32 systems, games, system drivers, Windows Embedded systems). If you aren't planning on pursuing a career on these markets, I wouldn't bother learning Win32 now. It is not that is useless and has no new things to teach you, but let's face it, there are so many new technologies coming out even at the time we speak. I have a dozen of technologies/languages in my waiting list to start learning and experimenting with. You can certainly find more interesting and more career favorable technologies to learn.
Performance critical apps (games) typically use C++ Win32 API.
C# and .NET are actually built on top of the Win32 API. To access some of the advanced features of Win32 that aren't exposed through C# and .NET you use Pinvoke to manually expose a C Win32 function to your C# app.
Since I have been mostly using script languages in the past time but now want to go to the "high-performance" level I decided to learn C++ some time ago.
I looked at some "beginner" tutorials and bought an O'reilly C++ pocket reference book (it's really helpful). My problem is that I now know all the basics but I'm not good enought to program a more complicated game, for example, yet.
Do I have to get one of those thick C++ books for further learning?
I'm going to use C++ on Windows mainly. What APIs beside Win32 are important for me?
My goal would be to write a small interpreter for a programming language I've though of - I managed that in several scripting languages already, what API/Library knowledge do I need in C++ to write one?
You don't need a thick book - you need a good one. Get Accelerated C++, written by Koenig & Moo, two of the original C++ development team.
Depends what you want to do.
You don't need anything - you can write a perfectly good interpreter or compiler using just the C++ Standard library. See this SO question for lots of info in this area.
Learn with books. C++ is a complex language. My suggestion is to first go with a rather quick introduction and general overview of the major programming paradigms that C++ supports: OOP and generic programming: Accelerated C++.
When you finish this book, you can go with the two volumes of Bruce Eckel's Thinking in C++ which are very detailed.
For UI programming, the best C++ toolkit is Qt, and it is multiplaform-ready. You can read "C++ GUI Programming With Qt4" (the first edition is free to download, just google it). If you want to stick with C++/Windows API, learn the Windows Template Library, altough it may be a bit hard due to lack of official documentation (altough there are good tutorials on the net). WTL is the way to go to create very small, lightweight applications (Qt DLLs on the other side, need a few MBs each).
I have always found that learning a language from a book is pretty difficult and that after you know the basics you should begin to program. So instead of picking up a thick manual I would check out something like http://www.cprogramming.com/tutorial.html#advanced or just google for c++ tutorial and something that you would like to try to make.
A good (and) thin book to get started in C++ is Accelerated C++ by Koenig and Moo.
I mainly do programming under Linux, but I hear a lot of bad things about MFC, so I'd try to find a different GUI library.
Once you get up to speed with some of the more complicated parts of C++ syntax, have a look at the Boost.Spirit libraries for parser generation. The various Boost libraries provide some very useful extensions to the Standard Library.
Honestly, In learning C++ i never picked up a book (no flaming please). The best advice i can give is to go to this page and go through the tutorial. It covers the majority of the C++ language (read: most commonly used features) and keeps it as simple as possible. As far as APIs that are important... well that is a matter of preference. No one toolkit/api has really "won", but Qt, GTK-- (gtkmm), and wxWidgets are all big players. And besides GUIs, you'll probably want to learn either the raw winsock2 and threading APIs OR the boost library's threading and network interfaces. I do agree that MFC is dying, and for windows-only development C# is taking an increasingly large role (even on linux/mono C# is starting to catch on... slowly).
Also, the best way to learn a language is to code. So don't just read a whole ton- without practical experience you're never going to learn the language. Ask questions, answer those you can, and write tutorials- for yourself if nobody else. Writing down what you've learned is a great reference, and the process of straightening everything out in your head to write it down in a fashion that another person can understand it alone is a great way to reinforce concepts. In a strange, but seemingly backwards, way I found the best way I learn programming is by helping other people with their questions.
#Neil- i disagree that online tutorials are "flat out wrong". If anything, the style they teach you might be geared towards readability rather than optimization- which in-my-not-so-humble-opinion is an advantage. In my limited experience I've found cplusplus.com a go-to reference for pretty much everything.
Specifically, to answer your questions:
1. No thick book needed. I've heard that the thinner ones can be useful as a quick reference, though.
It's completely subjective and depends on your goal. Boost's network and multithreading libraries are probably a good start.
between std::string, std::stringstream, and getline(std::istream&, std::string&) you should be pretty good. C++ comes with a whole ton of built-in functionality yet isn't too bloated/huge/impossible to learn. Take advantage of it. All of the parsing is built in already.
Please, for Pete's sake, don't use directly use the Win32 API. You'll be painting yourself in the Microsoft corner. There are plenty of cross-platform libraries out there you can use instead:
Standard C++ library: strings, file i/o, containers, algorithms
Boost for the everyday stuff they left out of the standard library: parsing, networking, threading, smart pointers, memory pools, date/time, matrices, etc... Boost libraries are peer-reviewed before being accepted and are high-quality. Boost is the breeding ground for libraries that eventually become part of the next C++ standard.
GUI Toolkits: Qt and wxWidgets are very mature and widely used. There are many more.
For C++ on windows, definitely learn Microsoft Foundation Classes (MFC). Without MFC, you have to implmenet all of the windows API stuff yourself, which is more C than C++ and can be quite a pain.
You also may want to get, learn, and use the boost C++ libraries. They aren't windows specific, but they are a great resource for anyone.
I highly recommend Stroustrup's Intro C++ book. It covers C++ and STL in a very approachable way.
After that you might consider looking into books on Qt, a multi-platform GUI toolkit, or WTL or MFC for Windows. You could do .NET + C++, but that would be a lot to learn. In my experience with Qt and MFC, books have not helped much. Tampering with sample apps, building small apps just to test out one kind of feature, and poking around the docs was the only way I could get my head around either library. The books I had tended to simply gloss over too much--they were not worth the money.
I'm looking to be able to build GUI applications quickly and painlessly as possible. I'm competent (though not expert, and have no formal training) in C++, but have never used a GUI building toolkit or framework or anything. I am not a professional programmer and am totally inexperienced and ignorant when it comes to building GUI apps. Have spent hours researching trying to figure out what to do; only getting more confused and discouraged though.
Qt and wxWidgets seem like the most popular options for cross-platform apps, though cross-platform isn't necessarily all that important to me; Windows-only is fine if that means the fastest learning curve.
Qt seems cool and the Qt Creator is sweet looking with lots of good demos, except it has its own classes for everything, and I'm not overly keen on learning a bunch of stuff that's only applicable to the Qt platform itself rather than more generally. I suppose I could avoid using the Qt classes except for the GUI stuff where I have to use them, but I have no idea how wise or unwise that would be.
I was thinking Visual Studio would have the smallest learning curve, but when I open a test GUI app, I see a bunch of foreign looking stuff like carats (^) all over the place - I found online that these mean "handles", which I have trouble even understanding the definition or purpose of ("sort of like pointers but not really" is basically how I've read people define them).
I know pretty much nothing about wxWidgets, or how it compares with Qt.
So every option has a big learning curve - and ideally I'd like to know which one minimizes the time you have to spend learning the toolkit/framework itself. Since I'm likely never going to be making money from the programs I create, the time I spend learning a specific toolkit would be pretty costly. I just want to be able to make a functional program using the C++ knowledge I have, but in GUI form. At the moment it seems if I want to make a GUI app, I'd have to spend way more time learning the GUI framework I'd use than writing the functional part of the app itself.
Any input from people wiser and more experienced than me would be appreciated :)
First and foremost, start simple. There's a lot to the subject. If you are finding it hard, don't try and take it in all at once.
Most of the good GUI packages have tutorials. The best advice I can give is that you try each of them, or at least a couple of them. They are the best short introduction you can have to the library you choose and if they are any good they narrow down what you need to absorb at first. That will give you some basis for comparison, because they are each trying to do very similar things (and you will see some of them before you are done), but they have different feels. You will likely find you have a preference for one and that's the one to get serious with. It will also give you a sense of what's hard about GUI programming as separate from the particulars of one package, which, if you have only used one, you won't have seen. Personally I find this sort of knowledge very helpful, because it makes me less intimidated by particulars.
Here's a list of tutorials in one place, though you have likely seen them already:
Qt's tutorial
WxWidgets' tutorial
Gtkmm book. Not quite a tutorial, though there are lots of examples.
.NET tutorials, either for WinForms or for WPF.
Second, it sounds to me that you need to get some in depth understanding of the concepts of GUI programming, not just a particular library. Here there is no substitute for a book. I don't know all of them by a long shot, but the best of the bunch will not just teach you the details of a toolkit, they will teach you general concepts and how to use them. Here are some lists to start with though (and once you have titles, Amazon and Stack Overflow will help to pick one):
List of Qt books
WxWidgets book (PDF version)
There are tons of WPF and WinForms books. I can't make a good recommendation here unfortunately.
Third, take advantage of the design tools (Qt Creator, VS's form building and so on). Don't start by trying to read through all the code they generate: get your own small programs running first. Otherwise it's too hard to know what matters for a basic program and what doesn't. The details get lost. Once you've got the basics down though, Do use them as references to learn how to do specific effects. If you can get something to work in the design tools, then you can look at particular code they generate to be able to try on your own hand-written programs. They are very useful for intermediate learning.
I'm not overly keen on learning a bunch of stuff that's only applicable to the Qt platform itself rather than more generally.
I second the comment of GRB here: Don't worry about this. You are going to need to learn a lot specific to the toolkit no matter which toolkit you use. But you will also learn a lot that's general to GUI programming with any of the decent toolkits, because they are going to have to cover a lot of the same ground. Layouts, events, interaction between widgets/controls, understanding timers -- these will come up in any GUI toolkit you use.
However do be aware that any serious GUI package is an investment of time. You will have a much easier time learning a second package if you decide to pick one up, but every large library has its personality and much of your time will be spent learning its quirks. That is, I think, a given in dealing with any complex subject.
I suppose I could avoid using the Qt classes except for the GUI stuff where I have to use them, but I have no idea how wise or unwise that would be.
You do not need most of the non-GUI classes of Qt to use Qt's GUI properly. There are a handful of exceptions (like QVariant) which you'll need just because the GUI classes use them. I found you can learn those on a case-by-case basis.
Which is the easiest to learn is really going to depend on how you personally learn.
Personally, I've found Qt to be the easiest to learn so far. The GUI classes are rather nice to use, but I've found the non-GUI classes to be excellent, making it easy to avoid a lot of common issues you'd normally get with a more basic API. The documentation is excellent, IMO, as are the books, the examples, etc. It's also being very actively developed, with a few new technologies coming in the near future (like DeclarativeUI).
I've found Visual Studio/Windows API/.Net to be a good bit more complicated to learn. The API documentation on MSDN is rather complicated and not really organized in a manner that I find intuitive.
I've tried learning WxWidgets a few times, but I've never liked the API documentation.
All this is just my personal experience, YMMV of course. I'd say just dabble in all of them and see which one takes you the furthest, it won't hurt to try multiple.
As a person who learned C++ through Qt, I can only say that they work very well together. C++ purists (like I have become) will find lots of things in Qt not to their liking (the moc preprocessor, e.g., and the continued absence of exceptions for error reporting), but looking back, Qt provided a very gentle introduction to C++ for me.
And if you're like me, you throw in a handful of boost libs in each Qt project, because we want to write "real" C++, not the softened thing Qt uses :)
I would suggest wxWidgets. To me, it's pretty intuitive and looks nice.
Code::Blocks was built with it, so check that out to see if you like the graphics.
There are also a slew of bindings for wxWidgets, such as wxPython, wxErlang, and others, so if you decide to switch off of C++, you can take wxWidgets with you.
I also use wxWidgets and use it all the time for Windows-only applications (the only downside is that wxWidgets is notorious for large .exe filesizes, which may or may not be a problem for you). I found it very simple to use from the start, especially when combined with a GUI designer (personally I use wxDev-C++).
I've never used Qt, so I can't speak to its simplicity, but I doubt the difficulty is on a vastly different scale than that of wxWidgets. However, what I can say is that no matter what API you use (wxWidgets, Qt, WinAPI, etc) your code will be "locked into" that particular platform, so don't worry if you feel that learning Qt will lock you into the Qt platform (because the same thing will happen with any of those APIs).
If you're working solely on Windows however, you may want to do a few simple programs with WinAPI first. That way you have a basic understanding of the lowest level of Windows GUI programming before you move onto Qt/wxWidgets. That said, if you're really into cross-platform programming, then don't worry about that and go straight into Qt/wxWidgets.
I can't intelligently comment on the learning curve aspect, but a quick survey of StackOverflow questions shows about twice as many Visual C++ questions as Qt questions. Probably means that there is a larger support group in place for Visual C++. Might make learning it a little easier if there are more folks to help out.
No matter what you pick, I am quite sure it won't be easy and painless.
Having said that, I know that in some schools they use FLTK because they consider it relativelly easy to learn. I have never tried it.
In my everyday work I use WTL which is as close to the system as it gets while still providing some level of abstraction over pure Win32. I am not sure if I would consider it easy to learn, though, especially given the lack of documentation.
I recommend codegear C++ builder (previously known as borland C++ builder) from codegear which comes with a 30 trial. The nicest thing about it is that the GUI provides you with components that you drop onto a form in a WYSIWYG fashion and make functional by adding code to handle the events it fires. It comes with a whole bunch of compontents out of the box and you can add 3rd party components to it too, like the awesome ExpressQuantumGrid from devexpress, or write your own. It's very powerfull if you know what you're doing but intuitive enough that a beginner can write a database CRUD application in about 20 lines of very simple code.
Since nobody has mentioned it yet, for the sake of completeness, have a plug for the Fox toolkit. This is the one I used last time I did any C++ UI work of my own volition. There are also binding for this to Ruby and Python (the latter being many years out of date, though).
In general, the choice of a toolkit for self-directed work comes down to personal preferences for
the layout manager style
the event handler registration style
How native the widget set looks/can be made to look
If cross-platforming is not necessary, try .net + msvs or delphi. easy, all-in-one, no pain.
Qt is the best option for you. It's the easiest to learn, the most elegant and powerful and it is completely free.
Visual C++: This is an IDE, but it comes with its own GUI library called MFC. MFC is an old library with many quirks and it is difficult to learn and use. Many C++ programmers use it on Windows because it comes from MS, it's fast and it's free if you buy Visual C++. Since VC++ is an IDE, you can also use wxWidgets and Qt with it, although in your particular case I would recommend Qt Creator instead.
You seem to have experimented with Managed C++. Don't use that, even MS recommends that you only use Managed C++ as glue between C++ and C#.
wxWidgets: This one was a strong contender up to the day when Qt became free for commercial projects. It was always in the shadow of Qt and it is known that the documentation is not very good and the API is not as easy to learn as Qt's. Cross-platform MFC would be a good way to describe it.
C++ Builder: Borland made too many mistakes with C++ Builder and ended up getting out of the dev tools business altogether. It was a good product and I originally learned Windows GUI programming in one of the first versions, but I won't use it any more. There are better options and it is too expensive.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
C++ just sucks too much of my time by making me micro-manage my own memory, making me type far too much (hello std::vector<Thingy>::const_iterator it = lotsOfThingys.begin()), and boring me with long compile times. What's the single best alternative for serious real-time graphics programming? Garbage collection is a must (as is the ability to avoid its use when necessary), and speed must be competitive with C++. A reasonable story for accessing C libs is also a must.
(Full disclosure: I have my own answer to this, but I'm interested to see what others have found to be good alternatives to C++ for real-time graphics work.)
Edit: Thanks everyone for the thoughtful replies. Given that there's really no "right" answer to this question I won't be selecting any particular answer. Besides I'd just pick the language I happen to like as a C++ alternative, which wouldn't really be fair.
What about D Programming Language?
Some links requested in the comment:
Win32 Api
Derelict (Multimedia lib)
I wouldn't discard C++. In fact, I would consider adding Boost to your C++ library, which makes the language much more usable. Your example would become:
BOOST_FOREACH( Thingy& t, lostOfThingys ) {
// do something with 't'
}
Boost has tons of tools that help make C++ a better language.
C# is a nice language that fits your requirements, and it is definitely suited for graphics, thanks to the efforts of Microsoft to provide it with great tools and libraries like Visual Studio and XNA.
Real-time + garbage collection don't match very well I'm afraid.
It's a bit hard to make any real-time response guarantees if a garbage collector can kick in at any time and spend an undefined amount of processing...
I disagree with your premise. When used carefully and properly, C++ is a great language, especially for a domain like real-time graphics, where speed is of the essence.
Memory management becomes easy if you design your system well, and use stl containers and smart pointers.
std::vector::const_iterator it = lotsOfThingys.begin()) will become much shorter if you use
using namespace std;
typedef vector::const_iterator ThingyConstIter;
And you can shorten compile times significantly by breaking up your systems into reasonably self-contained modules, by using precompiled headers, or by using the PIMPL idiom.
Perhaps a hybrid approach. Python and C++ make a good combination (see, for example, PyGame).
Some variation of Lisp that compiles to machine code could be almost as fast as C++ for this kind of programming. The Naughty Dog team created a version of Lisp called Game Oriented Assembly Lisp, which they used to create several AAA titles, including the Jak and Daxter series. The two major impediments to a Lisp approach in the game industry would be the entrenched nature of C/C++ development (both tools and human assets are heavily invested in C/C++), as well as the difficulty of finding talented engineers who are stars in both the game programming domain and the Lisp language.
Many programming teams in the industry are shifting to a hybrid approach wherein the real-time code, especially graphics and physics code, is written in C or C++, but game logic is done in a higher-level scripting language, which is accessible to and editable by programmers and non-programmers alike. Lua and Python are both popular for higher-level scripting.
Let's not forget to mention the new 'auto' use:
auto it = lotsOfThingys.begin(); // Let the compiler figure it out.
auto it2 = lotsOfFoos.begin();
if (it==it2) // It's still strongly typed; a Thingy iter is not a Foo iter.
As a developer/researcher/professor of 3D VR applications for some 20 years I would suggest there is no alternative (except possibly C). The only way to reduce latency and enable real-time interaction is an optimized compiled language (eg C or C++) with access to a fast relaible 3D graphics library such as OpenGL. While I agree it is flustrating to have to code everything, this is also essential for performanc and optimization.
Sometimes, looking outside the beaten path you can find a real gem. You might want to consider PureBasic (Don't let the name mislead you). Here's some details:
PureBasic Features
Machine Code (Assembly) executables (FASM)
In-line Assembly support
No run-times needed (no DLLs needed,etc.) 1 executable file
Tiny executables (as small or smaller/as fast or faster than C++ w/out the runtime)
You can write DLLs
Multi-thread support
Full OS API support
Multi-platform support
Windows 95-2003
Linux
Mac-OS X
Amiga
2D & 3D game development
DirectX
OGRE
Generous Licensing
Inexpensive (79 Euros or about $112)
Life-time license (all future updates & versions included)
One price for all platforms
External Library support
3rd party DLLs
User Libraries
On-line Support
Responsive development team led by it's creator
On-line forum
One place for answers (don’t have to go all over the net)
Huge amount of sample code (try code out while in IE with IEtool)
Fast replies to questions
Bonus learning (alternative to learning C++)
API
Structures
Interfaces
Pointers
Visit the online forum to get a better idea of PureBasic (http://www.purebasic.fr/english/index.php) or the main site: www.purebasic.com
I completely agree with the mention of C# for graphics programming. It has the slight disadvantage of being a managed language and allowing the garbage collector free reign over your application is framerate suicide after a while but with some relatively intelligent pool allocations made early in the program's life any real issues can be avoided.
Several people have already mentioned XNA, which is incredibly friendly and well-documented and I would like to echo that recommendation as well. I'm personally using it for my hobby game projects and it has treated me very well.
XNA isn't the only alternative, though. There is also SlimDX which is under constant development as a means of providing a lean wrapper of DirectX in a similar fashion as Managed DirectX (which was, I believe, discontinued by Microsoft in favor of XNA). Both are worthy of research: http://code.google.com/p/slimdx/
There are no true alternatives for big AAA titles, especially on the consoles. For smaller titles C# should do.
C# is a good answer here - it has a fair garbage collection (although you'd have to profile it quite a bit - to change the way you handle things now that the entire memory handling is out of your hands), it is simple to use, have a lot of examples and is well documented.
In the 3D department it gives full support for shaders and effects and so - that would be my choice.
Still, C# is not as efficient as C++ and is slower due to overhead, so if it is speed and the flexibility to use any trick in the book you like (with pointers and assembly if you like to get your hands dirty) - stick to C++ and the price would be writing way more code as you mentioned, but having full control over everything including memory management.
I would say the D programming language is a good option. You can link to C object files and interface with C++ code through C libraries. D has garbage collection, inline assembly, and game developers have created bindings to SDL and OpenGL libraries, and are also actively working on new game development apis. I love D. Too bad my job doesn't demand it's use. :(
Like James (hopkin), for me, the hybrid approach is the best solution. Python and C++ is a good choice, but other style like C#/C++ works. All depends of your graphical context. For game, XNA is a good platform (limited to win32), in this case C#/C++ is the best solution. For scientific visualization, Python/C++ is accepted (like vtk's bindings in python). For mobile game JAVA/C++ can works...
If you are targeting Windows, C++/CLI (Microsoft's .NET 'managed' dialect of C++) is an interesting possibility, particularly if you want to leverage your C++ experience. You can mix native code (e.g. calls to C-style libraries) with .NET managed code quite seamlessly, and take advantage of .NET GC and libraries.
As far as concerns about GC impacting 'real time' performance, I think those tend to be overblown. The multi-generational .NET GC is very good at never taking much time to do a collection, unless you are in some kind of critical low-memory situation. I write .NET code that interacts with electronic derivatives exchanges, where time delays == lots of $$$, and we have never had a GC-related issue. A few milliseconds is a long, long time for the GC, but not for a human interacting with a piece of software, even a 'real time' game. If you really need true "real time" performance (for medical devices, process control, etc.) then you can't use Windows anyway - it's just not a real-time OS.
Lot of game engines can fit your need, I suppose. For example, using SDL or Cairo, if portability is needed. Lot of scripting languages (coming in general with easy syntax and garbage collection) have binding to these canvas.
Flash might be another alternative.
I will just point out Processing, which is an open source programming language and environment for people who want to program images, animation, and interactions.
Actually, it is a thin wrapper around Java, making it look like a scripting language: it has a (primitive) IDE when you can type a few lines of code and hit Run without even having to save the file. Actually it wraps the code around a class and adds a main() call, compiles it and run it in a window.
Lot of people use it for real-time exhibitions (VJ and similar).
It has the power and limitations of Java, but adds out of the box a number of nice wrappers (libraries) to simplify access to Java2D, OpenGL, SVG, etc.
Somehow, it has become a model of simple graphics language: there are several applications trying to mimic Processing in other languages, like Ruby, Scala or Python. One of the most impressive is a JavaScript implementation, using the canvas component implemented in Firefox, Safari, Opera, etc.
I vote c++0x. Partial support is already available in gcc-4.3+ using the -std=c++0x flag.
Would 'C' be too obvious an answer?
I have very successfully used C++ for the engine, with the application written in Lua on top. JavaScript is also very practical, now the latest generation of JIT based JS engines are around (tracemonkey, V8 etc).
I think C++ will be with us for a while yet; even Tim Sweeney hasn't actually switched to Haskell (pdf) yet, AFAIK :-)
Java and LWJGL (OpenGL wrapper) has worked well for me. If you're looking for more of a scene graph type library like Orge have a look at jMonkeyEngine which we used to create a google earth type application (see www.skapeworld.com). If you're sensible with object creation the garbage collection is a non issue.
If your target is a PC, I think you can try C#, or embed Lua in your C++ app and run scripts for 'high-level' stuff. However if your target is a console, you must manage your own memory!
Objective-C looks like a good match for your requirements (the latest version with optional GC), although it is too dynamic and Smalltalk-like for my taste.
XNA is your best bet I think. Being supported by the .NET framework you can build for a Windows or Xbox 360 platform by simply changing a setting in Game Studio. Best yet, all the tools are free!
If you decide to go with XNA you can easily get started using their quickstart guide
XNA Quickstart guide
It has been a rewarding and fun experiance for me so far, and a nice break from the memory management of C++.
Garbage collection is a must (as is
the ability to avoid its use when
necessary)
You can't disable a garbage collector temporarily. You would need a deterministic garbage collector then. But such a beast does come with a performance hit also. I think BEA JRockit is such a beast and then you should stick to Java.
Just to comment on your example; typedef is your friend...
typedef std::vector<Thingy> Thingys;
Thingys::const_iterator it = lotsOfThingys.begin()
Don't overlook independent languages in your quest. Emergence BASIC from Ionic Wind Software has a built in DirectX 9 engine, supports OOP and can easily interface with C libraries.
http://www.ionicwind.com
James.
The best enviroment for your project is the one you get your task done in the fastest way possible. This - especially for 3D-graphics - includes libraries.
Depending on the task, you may get away with some minor directx hacking. Then you could use .NET and slimdx. Managed languages tend to be faster to programm and easier to debug.
Perhaps you need a really good 3D-engine? Try Ogre3D or Irrlicht. You need commercial grade quality (one might argue that Ogre3D offers that) - go for Cryengine or Unreal. With Ogre3D and Irrlicht you might uses .NET as well, though the ports are not always up to date and plugins are not as easyly included as in the C++ versions. For Cryengine/Unrealengine you won't have a real choice I guess.
You need it more portable? OpenGL for the rescue - though you might need some wrapper (e.g. SDL).
You need a GUI as well? wxWidgets, QT might be a possiblity.
You already have a toolchain? Your libraries need to be able to handle the file formats.
You want to write a library? C / C++ might be a solution, since most of the world can use C / C++ libraries. Perhaps with the use of COM?
There are still a lot of projects/libraries I did not mention (XNA, Boost, ...) and if you want to create some program that does not only display 3D-graphics, you might have other needs as well (Input, Sound, Network, AI, Database, GUI, ...)
To sum it up: A programming language is a tool to reach a goal. It has to be seen in the context of the task at hand. The task has its own needs and these needs may chose the language for you (e.g. you need a certain library to get a feature that takes long to programm and you can only access the library with language X).
If you need the one-does-nearly-all: try C++/CLI (perhaps in combination with C# for easier syntax).
Good question.
As for the 'making me type far too much', C++0x seems to address most of it
as mentioned:
auto it = lotsOfThingys.begin()) // ... deduce type, just like in *ML
VS2010beta implements this already.
As for the memory management - for efficiency - you will have to keep good track of memory allocations, with or without garbage collection (ie, make memory-pools, re-use allocated object sometimes) anyhow, so that eventually whether your environment is garbage collected or not, matters less. You'll have to explicitly call the gc() as well, to keep the memory from fragmenting.
Having consistent ways to manage memory is important anywhere.
RAII - is a killer feature of C++
Another thing - is that memory is just one resource, you still have to keep track of other resources with a GC, so RIAA.
Anyhow, C# - is a nice alternative in many respects, I find it a very nice language, especially the ability to write functional-style code in it (the cute lambda -> syntax, map/select 'LINQ' syntax etc), thus the possibility to write parallel code; while it's still a 'standard curly-brackets', when you (or your colleagues) need it.
Have a look to Delphi/Pascal Object and some exemples :
http://www.delphigamer.com or http://glscene.cjb.net/
You can look at Ada. There is no garbage collector but this language is oftenly used for real-time system needing high reliability. That means less debuging times for your 3D applications.
And, you can also look at Haskell, if you don't know the functional paradigm this language will look weird to you, but it's worth a bit of your time. Tim Sweeney (EPIC Inc) is considering this language as a C++ alternative.