3 ms·
I can definitely understand them wanting to drop custom C++ extensions, but it's a shame they can't figure out how to provide a nice development experience for
by sirwhinesalot 3y ago
I can definitely understand them wanting to drop custom C++ extensions, but it's a shame they can't figure out how to provide a nice development experience for their newer UI platforms. If only .NET actually works reasonably well with it (and there's a huge managed<->native overhead) maybe it should have just been WPF 2.0?
Not that I would use WinUI anyway, microsoft cannot be trusted with UI frameworks anymore.
- pjmlp 3y agoThe custom C++ extensions argument is a very bad lame excuse, it isn't as if WinRT was ever going to be cross platform, or not every single C and C++ compiler used in production (not toy compilers) doesn't have their own set of extensions anyway. I also don't consider anything related to WinUI/UWP trustworthy for production development, and I used to advocate for it. Stuff like how .NET Native, C++/CX => C++/WinRT transition, UWP => WinUI were managed, is how they lost most of us that really liked WinRT.
- sirwhinesalot 3y agoAll of that is fair, it's not like C++/CX was all that different from needing to use Obj-C on macOS. I'm just saying I can accept their reasoning. Using only standard C++ is better in a vacuum, but only if nothing is lost in the transition. May I ask what your plan is regarding UI at this moment? I've given up and gone the web route (with Avalonia on my pocket in case my sanity gets dangerously low).
- pjmlp 3y agoSimilar plan, in 2019 I went back going to distributed systems/Web, where Microsoft technologies are one among many others that get used on a polyglot agency, the usual "A jack of all trades is a master of none, but often times better than a master of one.". For doing Windows stuff, I would rather advocate for Win32, Forms/WPF. In regards to C++ stuff, either C++ Builder if it fits the budget, or Qt. It is quite tragic that even MFC has a better development story than WinUI/C++.
- avodonosov 3y agoHow about .NET MAUI?
- pjmlp 3y agoThey decided to rewrite Xamarin.Forms, it uses WinUI on Windows, Catalyst on macOS, and VS4Mac is now officially dead and one has to use VSCode instead, and they are all into this Blazor Hybrid as well, with Web views. Take your own conclusions on its future.
- jahnu 3y agoSame. The previous company I worked for we went all in on UWP for our Windows SDK. An almost complete waste of time as Microsoft failed to deliver on their promises.
- pjmlp 3y agoIt is baffling to watch community calls and have them talk about rewrites and dropped tooling features as if it wasn't a big deal, being asked for the n-th time since Windows 8.
- ok123456 3y agoJust use MFC 4.2 imho.
- sitzkrieg 3y agohonestly using plain win32api or mfc is the most stable bet on the planet
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y agoThanks to Wine, it is probably the most stable way to make a Linux GUI program as well.
- rbanffy 3y agoCOBOL, CICS and 3270 interfaces. That's where the action isn't, which is great if you want APIs that remain stable for decades.
- pjmlp 3y agoAs noted in some of my comments, the way C++/WinRT have messed up the development with total disrespect for paying customers is incredible. To come back to your point, the aging MFC has better Visual Studio tooling than C++/WinRT will ever have, specially now after being deprecated. I would have fired the whole team responsible for C++/WinRT.
- rbanffy 3y agoI really, really, am baffled at how difficult it seems to have a GUI builder tool that outputs a description of the UI that a program can just load (or a compiler transform into a structure inside the program) as objects the program can use, handling events and pushing presentation information into it. That was pretty much what VB did, with immense success.
- dleslie 3y agoIt was easy to do in Win95 through to Win2k because the interface was consistent throughout. Then they started changing the interface guidelines, and toolkit, for every major release of windows; and sometimes several times during the life of a major release.
- rbanffy 3y agoThis is also baffling. A button, a text input, a checkbox, a drop list, a combo - they all have a "default" look in every Windows version since 2.0 (1 didn't have the drop list, IIRC). It shouldn't be difficult to make an abstract description of a dialog box look at home with a new version of the OS and, yet, digging through Windows 10's built-in apps you sometimes find things that you recognize as skinned versions of Windows NT 4 dialogs. That they look like NT 4 dialogs with the Windows 7 skin applied is disconcerting, at best.
- wolpoli 3y agoThe Office team used to pioneer (hard-code) the look and feel for the UI, and then the Windows team goes and implement the look and feel system wide in a generic way. Then somewhere along the way, the Windows team decided to hard-code the look and feel that you could now do an archeological dig through decades of UI.
- rbanffy 3y agoI find it revolting that it is hardcoded this way. A button should look like a button.