In the same vein as my earlier post on Why You Shouldn’t Use Dev-C++ I’d like to outline a few reasons you shouldn’t still be using Visual C++ 6.0. These arguments may not apply if you’re working with a computer that is both particularly underpowered and running a very old (pre-’98) version of Windows, but in the overwhelming majority of cases VC++6 is a terrible choice of development environment.
- Visual Studio 6 was released over a decade ago in 1998. It is not only unsupported, but also predates the C++ standard and therefore behaves incorrectly in some cases; you may get errors when trying to compile perfectly valid C++!
- There are serious problems with the version of the STL which shipped with this compiler, leading to the need to use STLPort or similar solutions in many cases. Newer products ship with vastly improved versions of the C++ Standard Library (of which the majority of the STL is a subset).
- Newer libraries do not typically support the VS6 compiler or environment. You’ll often have trouble finding compatible binaries to work with (although you may still be able to compile from source yourself) and likely won’t find documentation for your outdated environment either.
- The programming community has moved on for the most part, making it hard to find people familiar with the error messages or layout of VC++6 if you need help.
- Alternatives are freely available. Cost should therefore not need to be a factor in your decision.
My recommendations for alternatives are the same as last time:
- Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 Express Edition is by far the best option when it comes to Windows-based IDEs; it costs nothing, allows commercial distribution of products, and is a fully featured solution including excellent debugging facilities.
- Code::Blocks is a good alternative if you for some reason wish to avoid the Microsoft offering.
- If you really want a simpler programming environment you would be better off using your choice of compiler in combination with Programmer’s Notepad or one of the many similar products out there: minimal resource usage, and no extra tools or features to clutter your screen-space or confuse you.
I’ve been using Visual C++ 6.0 I’m 100% satisfied with it it’s a wonderful tool.
I won’t give up this tool for nothing
Vs2008/VC++2008 is a crappy tool, too heavy it consumes a lot of system resources and it is not particularly revolutionary..
I use both , VC++6.0 uses only 5 Meg of Mem Usage where VS2008 uses more than 100 Meg under Task Manager, what a sh#t !
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you really want a simpler programming environment you would be better off using your choice of compiler in combination with Programmer’s Notepad or one of the many similar products out there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No I totally disagree I repeat Visual C++6.0 is a REALLY GREAT and AWESOME TOOL.
It satisfies 99% of your Windows developments needs.
I say 99% because of course new functionalities under VC++6.0 are unsuported
Comment by M.Marty — January 20, 2009 @ 2:24 am
Unless you’re using a fairly archaic development machine the increased resource usage from VS2008 shouldn’t be a major issue; in exchange for increased memory usage you get vastly improved standards-compliance (again, VS6 predates the standard!), a vastly superior implementation of the C++ Standard Library and a supported environment you can use with the latest and greatest available libraries.
At the least you should swap out the positively ancient pre-standard compiler and libraries and just use the development environment if you’re absolutely set on using VC++6; I’ve no idea how easily this is accomplished in the case of VS6 though and no longer own a copy of the environment to even think about trying it out.
I can accept people who have been using the product for years and who are stuck in thier ways using it for thier personal projects — I think they’re seriously missing out on better options, but I can accept it — but such an outdated and problematic environment should never be recommended to someone who is getting started now.
Comment by Jason — January 20, 2009 @ 3:19 am