|VB .Net Mesh Files|
I'm working on a game using d3d in VB .Net 2003. I am having alot of trouble with mesh files. If some one could post a simple example of using a mesh file I would really appreciate it. I'm new to game programming in d3d, I am coming from DirectDraw so any help is appreciated.|
|Eric Coleman||You'll have to look at C# resources if you want to find an example of using a mesh file. By "mesh file" I assume you mean directx's .X file format?
Microsoft really left VB in the dark when they released DirectX 9, there is hardly any documentation at all for VB programmers. If you find any good resources of information, then please let us all know.|
|ballistik||See there... just one more example of Microsoft's ploy to phase out VB!!! ... I smell conspiracy!... *hides under desk*|
|Zarneth||NOOOOOO!!!! Evil fiendish Micro$oft!!! We'll never let those bastards take away our beloved Visual Basic!|
|Lachlan87||I still don't get what the point of C# is. . . from my experience their seems to be extremly little difference as far as features/structure/speed compared to VB.NET. The only significant difference I noticed was how much harder C# code syntax was to type!|
|Zarneth||Mabye Microsoft were trying to make a VB clone, but actuially fool all the snotty anti-VB programmers into thinking it's a real language? (or what the anti-VB people classify asa real language that is). I seem to recall reading somewhere that they may also just be attempting to make C++ how they want it, as C++ being an official standard. Microsoft can't really mess with it all that much.|
|Almar Joling||at the www.gpwiki.org site you can find under "vb.net" some source for a MS3D loader (milkshape). Not sure if it works (can't try it o nmy video card).
.X is me way to complex to load, it's a to open format, imo.
|hotrodx||C# is a Microsoft's own Windows-only version of Java. They used to have Visual J++, but had a ruckus with Sun because of it (although last I heard it's all now settled). So they had to redesign everything from scratch. The result is the .Net Framework. Then they added VB.Net, which is basically C# with BASIC syntax.
I look forward programming in VB.Net, but I'm not rushing into things. Microsoft should've included the .Net Framework in Win2K or WinXP service packs (just as msvbvm60.dll is), but they didn't. That should've saved developers from including the 23 Megs of support files.
But let's face it, VB6, no matter how great it may be, needed some improvements that will contradict with backward compatibility. So they ditched the backward compatibility thing. Some of the things I read with VB.Net are really good (like Overloading). BUT I did get upset when they removed the Interpreted Run-Break-Continue debug IDE that made VB6 the best High-level programming debugger/IDE ever.|
|Eric Coleman||I know this is a vb website, but this thread is way off topic, and the guy that posted this probably will never return to this website, so I have no problems asking this question. [:p]
So does anyone know what the major difference is between C# and MANAGED C++? They both must compile to MSIL, so I can't imagine that there would be that much of a difference.|
Ahh. that's it. I was close. ;D
C# is a Microsoft's own Windows-only version of Java.
quote: heh. once you try the .net Dev environment you'll never want to go back. Particularly being able to shrink subroutines down to one line when you're not working on them. I no longer have to have loads of diferent modules to keep things organised and easy to find stuff in.
I look forward programming in VB.Net, but I'm not rushing into things.
quote:Yah. It took me a bit to figure out what why it wouldn't let me edit while it's paused. You can still at least pause and look at the contents of all the variables Hopfully they'll add it in eventuially. :\
I've yet to find any other major drawbacks in VB.net... Except that it seems now you have to go for a strange backward route to access the Left command.
Have people here heard about the VB at the movies thingi Microsoft are doing? (assuming it's still running) I'll be getting a free, supposedly full copy of VB.net 2003 soon for just reviewing a few crappy tutorial movies (which only the sound worked for for me anyway).
I'm curious to know what this Mannaged code stuff is too. o.O
BUT I did get upset when they removed the Interpreted Run-Break-Continue debug IDE that made VB6 the best High-level programming debugger/IDE ever.
|Lachlan87||If C# is just castrated java, why does Microsoft STILL sell J++?
From what I read Managed C++ doesn't really have any significant advantage over C#, but I don't have any personal experience.
AFAIK, the VB at the movies is no longer running. I got my copy just fine, but I got mine months and months ago. The sound only worked for me as well.|
|Zarneth||I've yet to get my copy. 'cause I'm not in the US. Was getting a friend to send it on to me but he lost his Job so couldn't afford to send it, among other complications. Finally should be getting it sent over soon thoguh. I'll have a full legal copy finally instead of a student version I got from Uni. Yay!
Supposedly it's 5 or so CD's. for just VB.net2003 alone. The copy I'm using now is the whole 2002 package with C++ and C# but it's only about 4 cd's. o.O|
|Iodiplin||C# was stupid. Now C++ programmers can easily program in a language that has almost NO speed advantage to VB! The point? No idea.
However, .NET really does have some nice features. But it's way too organized. Just to access simple stuff you've got to type in a bunch of class names and methods. I personally think OOP is next to 0 on the scale of usefulness, so I'm really biased against .NET, which is the epitome of OOP.
It's 5 CDs, not including the Student Help CD (which you probably won't get). I have the whole licensed shebang. It takes 2 hours to install and takes up 2 GB. I hate it with a firy passion. I do not believe VB.NET is worthy of the name VB. It should be called something completely different, because it IS completely different.|
Who better to compete with than yourself? [:D]
However, I think the main difference, (and I'm just guessing here) is that J++ programs will run on the java virtual machine and C# will run on the .net virtual machine. However, J++ still has Microsoft proprietary stuff, so your programs may or may not run on the SUN java vm. And for the record, there is a J# as well.
I think the comparison between .NET and JAVA is the whole sand box concept. JAVA programs run in a "sand box", which means that their functionality is limited to protect the operating system. Managed .NET code is the same way. Memory is managed by the runtime or virtual machine (whatever you want to call it), so the program can be as sloppy as it wants and doesn't have to worry about memory leaks or accidentally overwritting some other program's memory or crashing the whole computer. Overall it's great, but JAVA was doing it first, so by virtue of chronological order, .NET is a copy (in its ideas) of JAVA.
Of course, the whole "protected" feeling is a bit stupid, especially when it was just a few days after .NET 1.0 was released that security holes were found in the framework, so if you had installed 1.0 you had to turn around and download a big update to it as well, effectively doubling the size of what needed to be downloaded. I think 1.0 is now at service pack 3 or 4. I'm not sure about 1.1 since I don't have it installed, at least I don't think I do. [;)]
Originally posted by Lachlan87
If C# is just castrated java, why does Microsoft STILL sell J++?