OT: Porting to .NET

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sims
  • Start date Start date
S

Sims

Hi,

I have an app that works fine in VC++6, (All windows ver), but we now want
to port it to .NET, (simply to keep up with the tech changes and hopping
that it would alret us of possible problems in our app).

We did read many, many posts about the pros and cons of .NET v VC6 but we
still want to move forward and port to .NET so that our happy programmers
are kept on the edge of technology.

Now i have a few questions b4 i go...

1) Will i still be able to release a single exe & dl to the user or will i
need some other MS/.NET files to be released as well?
2) The app currently works fine on Win98/ME etc... Will it still work for
the older OSs?
3) What pitfalls should we lookout for when allowing .NEt to convert the
app.
4) Building the app gives me warnings that did not appear with Visual
Studio, is that because of a different setting or should i go forth and fix
them all?

We already have .NET 2002 but we could get .NET 2003 if need be...

Thanks for your comments.

Sims
 
I'll try and answer some of the questions:
1) Will i still be able to release a single exe & dl
to the user or will i need some other MS/.NET
files to be released as well?
Click to expand...

You will need the dotnet framework to be installed on the machine. This is
redistributable but is a hefty 20mb in size.
2) The app currently works fine on Win98/ME etc...
Will it still work for the older OSs?
Click to expand...

Dotnet applications will work on 98/ME etc. (but not 95). However you need
to be careful what classes and utilities you use from the framework as some
classes need Windows 2000 or better to run (e.g. SMTP mail and event log
clases)
3) What pitfalls should we lookout
for when allowing .NEt to convert the
app.
Click to expand...

Don't convert the application to .net. Re-design and re-write the
application to make use of the new features of .net. (assuming you have a
good time scale). Make sure your developers know all about the features of
..net so they don't end up re-inventing the wheel by writing stuff that has
already been implemented in the framework.


HTH,

Trev.
 
See inline...

Sims said:
Hi,

I have an app that works fine in VC++6, (All windows ver), but we now want
to port it to .NET, (simply to keep up with the tech changes and hopping
that it would alret us of possible problems in our app).

We did read many, many posts about the pros and cons of .NET v VC6 but we
still want to move forward and port to .NET so that our happy programmers
are kept on the edge of technology.

Now i have a few questions b4 i go...

1) Will i still be able to release a single exe & dl to the user or will i
need some other MS/.NET files to be released as well?
Click to expand...

I'm going to assume that by ".NET" you mean "Visual C++ .NET". You will
need to redistribute some new MFC dlls. Microsoft.com/Google is sure to say
something about this.
2) The app currently works fine on Win98/ME etc... Will it still work for
the older OSs?
Yes.

3) What pitfalls should we lookout for when allowing .NEt to convert the
app.
Click to expand...

You should backup your original VC++6 directory just in case!
4) Building the app gives me warnings that did not appear with Visual
Studio, is that because of a different setting or should i go forth and fix
them all?
Click to expand...

The Visual C++ .NET 2002/2003 compiler follows the C++ standard better than
the previous compilers did. These are the types of errors & warnings you
are likely to receive. Also, some MFC classes have changed slightly. Most
notably, a lot of the functions now support 64-bit integers.
We already have .NET 2002 but we could get .NET 2003 if need be...
Click to expand...

Visual Studio .NET 2003 is really nice. I did not work with Visual Studio
..NET 2002 too much, but it has the same feel as 2003. I am not sure how
much you will benefeit by upgrading to 2003. The primary reason I upgraded
to 2003 was to develop Pocket PC apps using the Compact Framework which
could not be done with 2002.
 
Hi again,

As correctly pointed out by Trevor i did mean "Visual C++ .NET", do i still
need to release the .NET architecture?

Sims
 
Hi,

Thanks for your replies,
You will need the dotnet framework to be installed on the machine. This is
redistributable but is a hefty 20mb in size.
Click to expand...

Does that apply to Visual C++ .NET as well?

Sims
 
Sims said:
Hi again,

As correctly pointed out by Trevor i did mean "Visual C++ .NET", do i still
need to release the .NET architecture?
Click to expand...

..NET Framework will be needed to install the IDE. If you are writing a
Visual C++ .NET application in unmanaged C++ (native C++) then you only need
to redistribute the newer version 7.1 MFC files. I recommend staying native
and just rebuilding the old code with the newer native compiler. You should
have the least amount of troubles taking this approach.
 
I'm going to assume that by ".NET" you mean "Visual C++ .NET". You will
need to redistribute some new MFC dlls. Microsoft.com/Google is sure to say
something about this.
Click to expand...

In C++ we could build statically, meaning that there was no need for Any
DLL's, is there not such a option i Visual C++ .NET
You should backup your original VC++6 directory just in case!
Click to expand...

Of Course, :)


Sims
 
Does that apply to Visual C++ .NET as well?

I'm not sure, but guessing, I'd say "no" if you don't use the managed
extensions, "yes" if you do use the managed extensions or any of the managed
framework (which contains 1000s of useful libraries).

My answers were based on you porting to managed code (using Managed C++, C#
or VB etc), not a recompile using VC++.

Trev.
 
Back
Top