Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Whidbey atl-less environment

Expand Messages
  • qwertyqaa
    It appears there is now a need for a free replacement to ATL since the MS Dorks have prevented ATL from being part of the whidbey express install package. I
    Message 1 of 8 , Sep 29, 2004
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      It appears there is now a need for a free replacement
      to ATL since the MS Dorks have prevented ATL from being part of
      the whidbey express install package. I couldnt really care about
      MFC, but ATL is needed with WTL for us to get by.
      thoughts?
    • Bjoern Graf
      Express is targeted at .NET and Windows Forms and does not feature a resource editor; and I wouldn t want to use it for anything else :) Anyway, all other
      Message 2 of 8 , Sep 29, 2004
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Express is targeted at .NET and Windows Forms and does not feature a
        resource editor; and I wouldn't want to use it for anything else :)
        Anyway, all other flavours of VS.NET 2005 come with ATL/MFC and RC
        editor so there's no real need to replace ATL in WTL.

        -- b.gr


        On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 01:27:45 -0000, qwertyqaa <maskofzero@...> wrote:
        >
        > It appears there is now a need for a free replacement
        > to ATL since the MS Dorks have prevented ATL from being part of
        > the whidbey express install package. I couldnt really care about
        > MFC, but ATL is needed with WTL for us to get by.
        > thoughts?
      • qwertyqaa
        I think it is ok not to have an RC Editor, one can get by without it - the layout language is not too hard to copy/paste/manipulate from elsewhere. but
        Message 3 of 8 , Sep 30, 2004
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          I think it is ok not to have an RC Editor, one can get by without
          it - the layout language is not too hard to copy/paste/manipulate
          from elsewhere. but removing atl just means you cannot compile a
          whole bunch of useful stuff, plus not use wtl etc.
          I cant believe that MS removed atl to just save space. In any
          case i am all for an ATL replacement just to make WTL complete.

          Isnt it ridiculous that a "student" cannot compile a whole bunch
          of MS samples? And BTW, its kind of suspicious that MSSDK download
          has ATL for win64 but not win32, else i wouldnt have bothered to
          even start this thread...

          The other motivation to work on a spinoff of WTL/ATL would be
          to get it to work with mingw and Borland.



          --- In wtl@yahoogroups.com, Bjoern Graf <bjoern.graf@g...> wrote:
          > Express is targeted at .NET and Windows Forms and does not feature
          a
          > resource editor; and I wouldn't want to use it for anything else :)
          > Anyway, all other flavours of VS.NET 2005 come with ATL/MFC and RC
          > editor so there's no real need to replace ATL in WTL.
          >
          > -- b.gr
          >
          >
          > On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 01:27:45 -0000, qwertyqaa <maskofzero@h...>
          wrote:
          > >
          > > It appears there is now a need for a free replacement
          > > to ATL since the MS Dorks have prevented ATL from being part of
          > > the whidbey express install package. I couldnt really care about
          > > MFC, but ATL is needed with WTL for us to get by.
          > > thoughts?
        • Bjoern Graf
          Comments inline ... Well, ok, with RC Editor I meant the dialog designer, not the string et al. manipulation editors. These indeed are simple to hand code. But
          Message 4 of 8 , Sep 30, 2004
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Comments inline

            On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 07:08:52 -0000, qwertyqaa <maskofzero@...> wrote:
            > I think it is ok not to have an RC Editor, one can get by without
            > it - the layout language is not too hard to copy/paste/manipulate
            > from elsewhere.

            Well, ok, with RC Editor I meant the dialog designer, not the string
            et al. manipulation editors. These indeed are simple to hand code. But
            building advanced (includes usable) dialogs without a designer is
            nothing I would want to do :)

            > but removing atl just means you cannot compile a
            > whole bunch of useful stuff, plus not use wtl etc.
            > I cant believe that MS removed atl to just save space. In any
            > case i am all for an ATL replacement just to make WTL complete.
            > Isnt it ridiculous that a "student" cannot compile a whole bunch
            > of MS samples?

            Again, the target audience is the novice student/hobbyist programmer
            that wants to do Windows Forms in C++/CLI, not the ones doing native
            Win32 applications. And for these Express is a nice IDE. Removing the
            Platform SDK from the download (which is required for ATL) does save
            lots of space.

            > And BTW, its kind of suspicious that MSSDK download
            > has ATL for win64 but not win32, else i wouldnt have bothered to
            > even start this thread...

            I assume that's because VS.NET 2003 doesn't include ATL64. VS.NET 2005
            most likely has ATL64 on board.

            > The other motivation to work on a spinoff of WTL/ATL would be
            > to get it to work with mingw and Borland.

            This motivation is a better one than getting Express support but I'm
            not sure if the number of users of these justify the amount of work to
            decouple WTL from ATL.
          • Igor Tandetnik
            qwertyqaa wrote in message news:cjgbe4+9ejd@eGroups.com ... This was a temporary stop-gap measure. ATL shipped with VC would not
            Message 5 of 8 , Sep 30, 2004
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              "qwertyqaa" <maskofzero@...> wrote
              in message news:cjgbe4+9ejd@...
              > And BTW, its kind of suspicious that MSSDK download
              > has ATL for win64 but not win32, else i wouldnt have bothered to
              > even start this thread...

              This was a temporary stop-gap measure. ATL shipped with VC would not
              compile with 64-bit compilers, and 64-bit compiler apparently is (or
              was) owned by SDK team, so they ported ATL3 to 64-bit and included it in
              the SDK.

              ATL version eventually shipped with Whidbey will work with 64-bit
              compiler, so when Whidbey officially ships, ATL will be pulled from
              Platform SDK.
              --
              With best wishes,
              Igor Tandetnik

              "On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray,
              Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right
              answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of
              confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." -- Charles
              Babbage
            • qwertyqaa
              well, it does make sense it is part of the sdk. since you are the creator of wtl can you outline what are the steps needed to get something like a replacement
              Message 6 of 8 , Sep 30, 2004
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                well, it does make sense it is part of the sdk. since you
                are the creator of wtl can you outline what are the steps needed
                to get something like a replacement (based on a define) going?

                I mean, are there interface dependencies you can think of?
                Otherwise it should really mean nothing more than a renamed,
                parallel family of classes.

                I propose we call it ATRL (Atl replacement library).



                --- In wtl@yahoogroups.com, "Igor Tandetnik" <itandetnik@m...> wrote:
                > "qwertyqaa" <maskofzero@h...> wrote
                > in message news:cjgbe4+9ejd@e...
                > > And BTW, its kind of suspicious that MSSDK download
                > > has ATL for win64 but not win32, else i wouldnt have bothered to
                > > even start this thread...
                >
                > This was a temporary stop-gap measure. ATL shipped with VC would
                not
                > compile with 64-bit compilers, and 64-bit compiler apparently is
                (or
                > was) owned by SDK team, so they ported ATL3 to 64-bit and included
                it in
                > the SDK.
                >
                > ATL version eventually shipped with Whidbey will work with 64-bit
                > compiler, so when Whidbey officially ships, ATL will be pulled from
                > Platform SDK.
                > --
                > With best wishes,
                > Igor Tandetnik
                >
                > "On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of
                Parliament], 'Pray,
                > Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the
                right
                > answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of
                > confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." -- Charles
                > Babbage
              • johndiiix
                Just to clarify, Nenad Stefanovic is the creator of WTL. Igor is one of the developers on the SourceForge project (as am I). John
                Message 7 of 8 , Sep 30, 2004
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Just to clarify, Nenad Stefanovic is the creator of WTL. Igor is one
                  of the developers on the SourceForge project (as am I).

                  John

                  --- In wtl@yahoogroups.com, "qwertyqaa" <maskofzero@h...> wrote:
                  > well, it does make sense it is part of the sdk. since you
                  > are the creator of wtl can you outline what are the steps needed
                  > to get something like a replacement (based on a define) going?
                  >
                  > I mean, are there interface dependencies you can think of?
                  > Otherwise it should really mean nothing more than a renamed,
                  > parallel family of classes.
                  >
                  > I propose we call it ATRL (Atl replacement library).
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In wtl@yahoogroups.com, "Igor Tandetnik" <itandetnik@m...> wrote:
                  > > "qwertyqaa" <maskofzero@h...> wrote
                  > > in message news:cjgbe4+9ejd@e...
                  > > > And BTW, its kind of suspicious that MSSDK download
                  > > > has ATL for win64 but not win32, else i wouldnt have bothered to
                  > > > even start this thread...
                  > >
                  > > This was a temporary stop-gap measure. ATL shipped with VC would
                  > not
                  > > compile with 64-bit compilers, and 64-bit compiler apparently is
                  > (or
                  > > was) owned by SDK team, so they ported ATL3 to 64-bit and included
                  > it in
                  > > the SDK.
                  > >
                  > > ATL version eventually shipped with Whidbey will work with 64-bit
                  > > compiler, so when Whidbey officially ships, ATL will be pulled from
                  > > Platform SDK.
                  > > --
                  > > With best wishes,
                  > > Igor Tandetnik
                  > >
                  > > "On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of
                  > Parliament], 'Pray,
                  > > Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the
                  > right
                  > > answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of
                  > > confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." -- Charles
                  > > Babbage
                • Igor Tandetnik
                  qwertyqaa wrote in message news:cji5lt+4n4a@eGroups.com ... (Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer). I strongly suspect it would be illegal
                  Message 8 of 8 , Oct 1, 2004
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "qwertyqaa" <maskofzero@...> wrote
                    in message news:cji5lt+4n4a@...
                    > I mean, are there interface dependencies you can think of?
                    > Otherwise it should really mean nothing more than a renamed,
                    > parallel family of classes.

                    (Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer). I strongly suspect it would be illegal
                    to simply take ATL sources, pick the classes you need, rename them,
                    bundle with WTL and distribute freely. WTL was open-sourced, ATL was
                    not. It is still bound by the original license you paid for when you
                    purchased your copy of Visual Studio.

                    Off the top of my head: WTL relies on ATL's windowing subsystem, namely
                    CWindow, CWindowImpl, C[Ax]DialogImpl, message map, the thunking
                    mechanism for installing the window proc. This windowing support also
                    partially depends on module classes (CComModule in ATL3, CAtlWinModule
                    in ATL7). If you want to host ActiveX controls, you need hosting
                    support, e.g. CAxWindow. And of course if you want your app to be a COM
                    server (one of the options in WTL Wirard), you need pretty much all the
                    rest of ATL.
                    --
                    With best wishes,
                    Igor Tandetnik

                    "On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray,
                    Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right
                    answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of
                    confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." -- Charles
                    Babbage
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.