top | item 40839503

(no title)

cjk2 | 1 year ago

The painful bit is C++. I did a fair bit of that going back to MFC. Knocking stuff out in C# with WPF and WinForms was quite nice in comparison. I haven’t found anything nicer.

discuss

order

7thaccount|1 year ago

C# with WPF or WinForms only seems nice in comparison to other relatively painful tools IMO.

The old RAD graphical tools and newer ones like Rebol (that are now dated) show just what is possible. Mathematica is also pretty powerful and doesn't require a ton of code.

cjk2|1 year ago

Totally agree with this.

I’ll get shot for this one but I write most of my GUIs in Excel these days.

chipdart|1 year ago

> The painful bit is C++. I did a fair bit of that going back to MFC.

I'm sorry but referring to MFC while referring C++ is a telltale sign you don't really have any meaningful experience in the field. Developing GUI apps for Windows is a breeze with frameworks like Qt. You only suffer if you're a masochist, but the rest of us prefer to pick things that make sense.

cjk2|1 year ago

I have a lot of experience, in the real world, which is somewhat less ideal than "just use Qt - it's a breeze".

How do you manage a 15 million LOC desktop app originating from the late 90s which contains chunks of win32 native, ATL, MFC, custom GDI+ wrappers all sorts?

Aye you fuck off and work somewhere else that's what you do. Which is why it's still written in win32 native, ATL, MFC, custom GDI+ wrappers.

They paid two companies to come in and rewrite it, first in Qt which was a complete failure. Then in Electron etc, which was also a failure.