development in vpc possible?

pb

I am interested in using Virtual PC to do some software development (writing C/C++ code, compiling and testing the application). For some reasons this should be done in a laptop, but I can choose to not use a PC one. So, anyone with similar experience? Is that possible?



Thanks,

PB

telomar

Yeah you can use VPC to produce and test software. Where possible I would suggest writing it within OS X as it will be faster but you can definitely move it to VPC to test, although personally I like to test it on an actual PC too. If you have access to a computer lab that would do the trick though.

pb

[quote]Originally posted by Telomar:

<strong>...although personally I like to test it on an actual PC too. If you have access to a computer lab that would do the trick though.</strong><hr></blockquote>



Thanks for the reply Telomar. I would like however to know if there exist some issues when I try to run a C++ compiler in VPC, build interface for windows applications and finally, as you mention, test the software on a real PC. The final product must be able to run on PC, not only VPC.



[ 01-14-2003: Message edited by: PB ]</p>

airsluf

pb

[quote]Originally posted by AirSluf:

<strong> Compiles under post VPC 3.0 take twice as long as earlier versions (which was already pretty slow)



[ 01-14-2003: Message edited by: AirSluf ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



If I understand well, your main complain is about speed. So, apart the OpenGL issues, everything else seems to be working although a BIT slowly...right?

As for compile times, could you give me some example? It would much help, as I never used VPC and have no idea.

airsluf

pb

[quote]Originally posted by AirSluf:

<strong>Something that would take 5-10 sec on a ~1Ghz P4 would take about 2 min on VPC 3 and about 4 min in VPC 4+. All the while you can listen to the drive thrash away...</strong><hr></blockquote>



Thank you, now this makes sense.



[quote]<strong>

Compiling and linking to MFC gets worse timewise and Vis C++ was really difficult to control.

</strong><hr></blockquote>



What about other compilers?

rick1138

You're going to have the same problem. Programming on Windows sucks in general. I had serious problems getting some code to compile on other compliers that had been written for VisualStudio C++, because of MSs non-ANSI compliance - it took me probably a full day of work to get a simple few thousand line command line tool to compile.

telomar

[quote]Originally posted by PB:

<strong>



Thanks for the reply Telomar. I would like however to know if there exist some issues when I try to run a C++ compiler in VPC, build interface for windows applications and finally, as you mention, test the software on a real PC. The final product must be able to run on PC, not only VPC.</strong><hr></blockquote>



Most things in VPC aren't going to be as fast as they will be on an actual PC and you will definitely see the odd issue.



Anything that involves graphics of any great level simply shouldn't be built using VPC. It's graphical emulation is very outdated and there is a good chance you will see bugs.



Beyond that I've always just found it a matter of speed. If you expect very large projects with a lot of compiling and recompiling then you'll probably want to just find yourself a cheap PC. If you are just doing university level stuff I'd say it'd do the job.



Definitely give yourself time to test though. I remember going in to present a new piece of software for data analysis and when it ran the UI flashed horribly. Had there been an epileptic in the room I would have sent them into a seizure. Under VPC it just froze for a while then it finished.



I also spent most of the morning having to rewrite a section of the code because it failed when you used over 2000 data entries on an actual PC.



I can't remember the specific issues but I do remember compiling the thing wasn't the easiest task (Borland C++). Little errors kept popping up and working out why was always a fun task. Doing the work on a PC is definitely more pleasant.



That was also the first time I wrote a program entirely on the mac then ported it though.



You'll definitely see bugs it is just really a matter of how important it is to you, how tight your time constraints are and how large the project is. Larger projects require more testing and you need to account for it. You will also definitely lose time from using VPC over an actual PC.



My suggestion would be if you can to test it out for yourself. It can be exceptionally painful but it can also be relatively pain free.



[ 01-15-2003: Message edited by: Telomar ]</p>

pb

Very helpful your message. The graphics involved are not too complex, say something like plotting 2d or 3d functions. By the way, how is Borland C++? And with VPC now in version 6, are there some improvements in this area?

airsluf

telomar

[quote]Originally posted by PB:

<strong>The graphics involved are not too complex, say something like plotting 2d or 3d functions. By the way, how is Borland C++? And with VPC now in version 6, are there some improvements in this area?</strong><hr></blockquote>



I will warn you it was 2D plots where I had that flash bug so you will see bugs even at that level. My solution eventually was just to let the bug stay and hide it while it ran. Bad programming but it did the job.



I can't comment on VPC 6 as I haven't tried it. Borland C++ is decent. It was slow but I expected that and in the end most of the troubles I had were relatively minor.



I'm inclined to agree with AirSluf here. If you can't test it out first just get a dirt cheap PC.

pb

OK, thank you all guys for your valuable comments. Now I have to decide and...hmmm...no pain please!