For all issues regarding the Forums use, please, refer to the Forum Rules.

Our Solutions

Need professional assistance?
Consider our:

Support Offerings

 

Need to speed up your development?
Have a look at our:

Samples & Tools

 

Need some functionality extending standard OCCT capabilities?
Check out our:

Adv. Components

Related pages

Building a sceleton app in VC++ 8.0

Janko Jerinic's picture
Forums: 

Hi,

Can anybody please share some information on how to actually make a basic (buildable) OpenCascade 6.2 project in VC++ 8.0. I can't even build the tutorial app, because a tool is reporting an error about some files missing. Please, I'm soo restraining myself from using caps.

Thx,
Jackie

P Dolbey's picture

I answered a similar question on this thread.

http://www.opencascade.org/org/forum/thread_11233/

However it does assume that you access to an environment that can run Visual Studio 6.0. I've seen this question asked several time and the MFC samples haven't really been updated with more recent OpenCascade releases. I've moved onto Qt4 as a framework, primarily because of its multi-platform capabilities, but also because of its cleaner interface design.

But how much demand is there for a starter application for VS2005? From previous threads there seems to be some significant need. If so I might be tempted to back port my Qt4 application onto an MFC framework. This would be a single-document application (SDI)model, with some of the viewer code optimisations I used in Qt4 - SDI is simpler in my opinion and makes for a better CAE application pattern - even Microsoft seem to agree with that these days, if you've seen Word 2003.

Would this be useful? - if so what's the requirements? (And I make no promise about delivery dates.)

Pete

Stefan Boeykens's picture

I would suggest to go cross-platform and forget about MFC... Qt4 is a nice environment and would be easier to have an OSX version, whenever OpenCASCADE is running out-of-the-box in OSX too.

I recently switched from MDI to SDI (to avoid complexities) and have switched from MFC to Qt a few years ago. No regrets...

P Dolbey's picture

Stefan,

I completely agree about both Qt4 and MDI. However, there are commercial issues with licensing Qt4 apps, and the QtWin'd patches for the open source aren't officially sanctioned or supported, even if they are GPL compatible. I learned a lot about simplifying the original Qt3 MDI demos into a Qt4 SDI viewer that could still be useful as MFC starter app. But I'll only do it if there's a demand - an so far no one's asked!

Pete

Pete

Stefan Boeykens's picture

It's true about the licensing issues with Qt applications. But a skeleton doesn't have to be a full application framework.

Ideally, there would be a skeleton for both, prepared in a such a way that they could both serve as a similar structure to build upon.

I have started my earlies MFC applications from appwizard generated stuff and for Qt I have started from demo-applications.

But one of the difficulties I see, is that the MFC examples all started from the assumption that the data structure follows MFC rules and thus all objects inherit from CObject. This makes it much harder to integrate a custom data structure into an MFC application.

And that is always the problem: I often want a layered approach: a layer of my own data structure, a layer of a geometric kernel on top of it, a layer of a GUI framework on top of it, each independent of the others. Would make swapping one of the components easier, when things evolve (e.g. Qt vs. MFC vs. wxWidgets, ACIS vs. OpenCASCADE vs. Parasolid etc...).

P Dolbey's picture

Yes, you mean something like

http://www.omg.org/
http://projects.opencascade.org/3dwb/cadservices

Still waiting on that one...

Pete

Contact us

Attention: DO NOT use this form for all kind of request for the removal of your personal data. Please follow this link for such cases.