Visual C++ and GUI Design

Finally learned enough C++ that I'm comfortable using it most of the time, but if I want a GUI I've got a problem.

With Visual C# I grew accustomed to the form designer, and I see Visual C++ has something like that too, but it appears to only be available if I opt use the .NET/CLR/managed code/whatever you call it.  I don't want to use .NET anymore, I want to stick to "normal" stuff and compile _native code_

I learned enough Windows API calls to create a window and put some stuff on it, but creating entire applications like that seems ridiculous. I'd like to be able to see what it looks like *before* I compile it...

I know every native Windows app out didn't have its UI design done in code, typing in numbers and shit... So I know there must be a solution.  What is it?

Terrible!

Using C# is "normal".  Don't waste your valuable time on Sepples.

I have yet to see anything quite as good as the VS.NET form designer without being limited in other ways (e.g. ≤VB6, Delphi/the C++ variant/whatever it's called now).
Qt Designer or OS X Interface Builder come the closest
If you must use C++ and must make a GUI with a GUI GUI creator, use Qt.  But it still requires more handwritten code than equivalent Windows Forms (no big deal, as everything is well documented).

Thanks, Qt has been recommended to me.

I guess I kind of want the best of both worlds... to design visually, but be able to use and familiarize myself with actual Windows controls and the callbacks and API calls involved.  I downloaded an application that uses Qt and am pretty disappointed I can't use WinSpy++ to get handles for the textboxes and stuff :(

I wonder what they used to design MS Office?  uTorrent?  Apps that don't use .NET but have way too much stuff for the layout to have been done by hand

>>4
Use DBus. Don't worry about WinSpy, there's probably an equivalent for Qt.

>>3

C# maybe "normal" but that doesn't take away the fact that compilers on other platforms are available but not fully implemented...

So, in this case Sepples is better for cross platform programs.

Enjoy your platform bound language.

>>4
μTorrent is raw, _disgusting Windows API. Forget about interface builders.

MS Office uses MFC, which is kind of gross compared to Qt but gives nice end results on Windows. You can get a very Office-like look very quickly if you use the additions they put in the last few years. Example: http://10rem.net/blog/2010/03/25/your-first-mfc-cplusplus-ribbon-application-with-visual-studio-2010

However, as an EXPERT SATORI PROGRAMMER, I usually build my GUIs in Qt for the portability and much nicer interface it has than MFC, wxWidgets & al.

>>6
Mono is very much compatible with .NET. A few times I have indeed found a missing feature, but usually it's already in SVN.

Not advocating using .NET/Mono for cross-platform applications, I don't have experience with that.

>>6
Enjoy your [x]
Back to the imageboards, please

>>6
mono's compiler is better than microsoft's compiler, and mono works great everywhere i've tried it.
mono's c# compiler even compiles things in a reasonable amount of time on my router, something that can't be said for gcc's sepples compiler.

Qt, you can use Qt Creator for code & Qt Designer for form making, also it has some cool libraries that support 3D graphics.

>>10
Hold up. Are you saying your router is your dev box? What the hell?!

>>1

ngen.exe if you want to compile your .Net assemblies in to native code. But only a faggot is bothered by compiling and running CLI compiled apps.

You are also a faggot if you are coding new Windows GUI apps using Windows Forms, MFC, anything that uses GDI. GDI is legacy shit.

Real cool niggers are using DirectX and APIs that wrap it to make GUI apps now, and have been for years.

>>13
Enjoy your non-native-looking GUIs which don't take into advantage of natively built facilities the OS offers. GDI may be legacy, but it works and most of the time you don't need much more. A lot of people reinvent GDI for their custom GUIs and just end up with all kinds of subtle bugs, not unlike people that make "web GUIs" entirely in javascript and end up giving up support for things a browser provides for native pages.

* Homosexual
* African-American

>>14
non-native-looking isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'd rather have a well designed KDE program on windows than a shittily designed native one.

I guess that should be s/KDE/QT/

>>13
Op here.  CIL runs way too slow

>>16
windows
Well, shit.

>>19
It was an example, try not to dwell on it. I chose Windows because I don't like the way it looks. If it makes you feel better pretend I said Mac/Linux/BSD/Haiku/Plan9/Solaris/DreamOS/whatever

>>20
What, no Irix? (See 'cause Irix apps all have these garish and slow ported widgets with them.)

I know every native Windows app out didn't have its UI design done in code, typing in numbers and shit... So I know there must be a solution.  What is it?
It's called a resource editor, idiot. If you read more about the Win32 API you'd know.

>>22
click buttan