SDK Idea

[vortex2]

Hey everyone .

Part of the greatness of MMF 2 is the ability to add new extensions to it. This benefit allows people to expand the functionality of the products as they see fit and it holds a lot of future potential.

As members of the EDT, I think we can all understand and appreciate this fact.

With that being said, why is it that such little work is being done to make extension development more accessible to the masses? Free compilers are unsupported, and it becomes impossible to use Visual C++ 2005 Express becuase of the lack of a resource editor.

Why not remove the need for a resource editor or work towards supporting something such as the Code::Blocks IDE, so that all users can have the benefit of extension development?

We are running into a situation where it is going to become very hard if not impossible to bring modern technology into MMF 2, simply becuase the SDK is designed using outdated technology.

Windows API is slowly being phased out, and even MFC is old. The future direction of everything is the .NET framework, however the SDK doesn't support it.

Without the ability to use new compilers, and with new code libraries dropping support for older compilers, what are we supposed to do?

This is a call to action. We need to look into changing the way the SDK works now, as opposed to waiting for later. Without improvements in this area, we are going to be forced to keep MMF 2 in the past.

[Jeff]

I don't really understand what reply your looking to get?

Do I agree with you yes 100%

After some big deals fall into place in 2007 I am sure a lot of things will change.

[vortex2]

Mainly to start discussion on the topic and gain insight into other peoples opinions .

So feel free to talk about what we want to change and how we are going to go about it.

[Yves]

We have tried to make the SDK compatible with Borland C++ and DevC++, both failed due to MMFS2.DLL, as apparently they don't support the way MSVC exports C++ classes. For the moment we are stuck with MS compilers, unless someone finds a free compiler that works with the DLL.

About the lack of resource editor in VC Express, probably free resource editors exist? And with the new properties you don't really need a resource editor as for most the extensions you can have only menus and strings (for properties), very easy to edit in text mode.

I don't know the .NET framework enough to know if it can make DLLs that can be supported by MMF2. I'll try to do it later, it's already on my todo list, but maybe you know how to do...

Also, just a general comment, the SDK is open to everyone, you can adapt it yourself if you want, you don't need to wait for Clickteam to make the changes you would like. If you want to make an extension with the MFCs, you can do it, just change the project settings... If you know how to build DLLs with C#, just adapt the SDK to fit your needs, and if that works then maybe you could share your results with everyone?

Yves.

[Sphax]

Agree with all ^^

But I'm not agree about the fact that VC6 is outdated. If you install the new Microsoft SDKs, VC6 will be powerful for the actual features.

[vortex2]

It is outdated. Have you tried to build the new DirectX SDK or the ODE engine using Visual C++ 6.0? .

My search for free resource editors turned up no real results sadly . I was unable to find one that would work correctly.

I have had some minor success using .NET in MMF 2.. I might experiment with this further. The key is to use IJW to allow unmanaged c++ to run managed code. Something like this: Using .NET in MMF 2.

[LIJI]

Actually, I did compile a Project that used DirectX with Visual C++ 6.0, I had no problems with it.
But I do agree that the SDK should work with more compilers as possible.
When it comes to programs made by Microsoft I usually prefer the older ones, They like adding really useless "features" (for example the theming for Windows XP and the Horrible built in firewall that blocks everything) that actually cause nothing but slow downs and troubles. and of course new security holes are included as new features.
I'm happy with my old VC++ 6, but if I could use a non-MS compiler that will work fine with the SDK it will be great .

[vortex2]

You can't compile a project that uses the features of DirectX 9.0 in Visual C++ 6.0, as it is impossible. You can compile it if it uses a lower version of DirectX, but not 9.0.

The main reason I have to use 2005 is that ODE doesn't work in Visual C++ 6.0.

[Jax]

To be fair that is because Microsoft are inventing extensions to C++ and using those (Especially managed code stuff I think). I don't really think you can thus call MSVC++6 outdated. It afterall nearly supports standard C++, bar a few differences.

Apparently it is also the most used in companies and so on (I've no first hand experience of this though).

Nevertheless, working with the GCC C++ compiler I think is important and when it is possible should be done.

There isn't much extension development at all at the moment, I wonder why? Also I think there is very very little extension documentation by users at the moment.

[vortex2]

I am trying to get FireMonkey to release CICK 2 and then when I get some time, I will work on a new extension development tutorial. The lack of a resource editor is making it slightly hard though, as I don't know what to tell them.

I happen to have both Visual C++ 6.0 and 2003 which I can use to edit resources, but they might not be so lucky.