Programming for Windows

Wimnat · 23 Aug 2006 at 00:12

I want to start writing my own simple programs for Windows XP. Just something simple like a wallpaper changer. I have a basic knowledge of C but I have no idea what the best language to program in for windows is or where to start.

Does anyone have any advice or know any websites that could give me a better understanding of where to begin?

Thanks

Thrash · 23 Aug 2006 at 04:36

As discussed many time before, get Microsoft C# Express, which is a free downloadable development environment for Windows. It even comes with a sample screensaver project if I remember rightly.

MrWhippy · 23 Aug 2006 at 11:24

as thrash said, C# is probably what you should be looking into.

but, as i posted here, you can program for windows in C, it was all done that way once, and there's a link to a tutorial on how to do so in my previous post (if you are the masochistic type

)

n3crius · 23 Aug 2006 at 20:21

only one choice for you, c#.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_Sharp

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vcsharp/learning/default.aspx

MossyUK · 23 Aug 2006 at 22:34

why do you guys not recommend visual basic?

Caged · 23 Aug 2006 at 22:35

Because it's LANGUAGE!

Welshy · 23 Aug 2006 at 22:39

MossyUK said:
why do you guys not recommend visual basic?

Because he said he wanted a wallpaper changer etc, whereas visual basic is better for making windowed programs quickly and easily.

Cant really recommend a particularly language myself, as there's quite a few that would be more than suitable

MossyUK · 23 Aug 2006 at 22:45

Caged said:
Because it's *****

Thanks for the input. :rolleyes:

Any chance you could elaborate as too why?

Inquisitor · 23 Aug 2006 at 22:55

MossyUK said:
why do you guys not recommend visual basic?

Because it's old, not supported by Microsoft any longer, nowhere near as versatile as C#, and teaches bad habits

Thrash · 23 Aug 2006 at 22:58

The differences between VB.Net and C#.Net are not really that important, the key is learning the .Net framework and what it can do. After that it is really down to if you prefer the VB syntax or C# syntax.

That's fine if you do not intend to develop in any other languages. VB is a bit of a dead end language wise, whereas if you can code in C# it's a much smaller step to transfer over to Java and C++. It also teaches you good object orientated principles and probably enforces a better coding style.

~J~ · 23 Aug 2006 at 23:04

Caged said:
Because it's LANGUAGE!

don't be such a idiot, give a constructive answer or not at all, and with a post count as high as yours, I'd have thought you'd know to keep the swearing to a null level.

robmiller · 24 Aug 2006 at 00:30

MossyUK said:
Thanks for the input. Any chance you could elaborate as too why?

It does everything that C# does, but worse. Why bother unless you have to maintain a legacy app?

arty · 24 Aug 2006 at 19:32

robmiller said:
It does everything that C# does, but worse. Why bother unless you have to maintain a legacy app?

Actually, I think VB.net doesn't quite support as much as C#. My main reason for not using it would be that it is inelegant, pointless, difficult to read, utterly unsuited to OO development and frankly just a complete joke

arty

fini · 24 Aug 2006 at 19:43

VB rocks - VB.net sucks - they killed the language

fini

Chaos · 24 Aug 2006 at 21:34

Seems like C# is the way to go, im just learning it myself and was recommended the Visual C# step by step book.

Theres a guide to making a wallpaper changer with C# or VB on Microsofts site -

http://msdn.microsoft.com/coding4fun/inthebox/wallpaper2/default.aspx

BigPete · 24 Aug 2006 at 22:52

I'm a big fan of Java

/runs and hides

Berserker · 25 Aug 2006 at 01:50

BigPete said:
I'm a big fan of Java

/runs and hides

Reckon he'll swing?

sorry :-p

I'm so last century with my C++, Win32 API, and heck, even a little MFC (now ATL) thrown in.

OK, C# it is then. Not used it myself though (yet).

Haircut · 25 Aug 2006 at 10:30

fini said:
VB rocks - VB.net sucks - they killed the language

fini

No, they made it into a real language.
Any form of VB prior to .NET is horrible - luckily I don't have to work with it anymore

Buttons · 25 Aug 2006 at 10:37

VB.NET is lovely. Anyone who says it's not as easy to read as C# is bonkers.

VB is in English so I can't possibly understand why it's harder to read than that C# gobbledygook.

There is very very little you can't do in VB.NET that you can in C#. So there.

Oh, please append FACT to each sentence according to your taste.

Inquisitor · 25 Aug 2006 at 12:10

Buttons said:
VB is in English so I can't possibly understand why it's harder to read than that C# gobbledygook.

That's precisely why I don't like VB.NET. A programming language shouldn't read like a spoken language, it's a fundmentally different thing, and the syntax of VB is just so clunky and inelegant. Anyway, if you need a programming language to read like English in order to understand it, then something's not right

There is very very little you can't do in VB.NET that you can in C#. So there.

True. They are, as languages, very similar. The thing about VB.NET is that it only exists for the old VB6 programmers. Other than that, there's practically no point in it. At the end of the day, C# is the language that's getting all the support from Microsoft, so it makes sense to go with it. It was built from the ground up to work with the .NET Framework, whereas VB.NET is an adaptation of an older (and in my opinion, inferior) language that is completely unsuited to OOP and the .NET Framework.