[deaddodo]

Imagine classic Visual C++ with it's form builder (versus the modern WinRT stuff) and hooks...it's much like that. I would say the experience is a little smoother. I do remember the version I used to use had issues with the form builder to where getting exactly what you wanted was finicky (the rendered/preview version was never quite what the compiled version ended up as).

[pjmlp]

If only VC++ ever had a form builder for C++ like C++ Builder has been doing for 30 years.

[deaddodo]

https://softelvdm.com/Vault/softelvdm.com/documentation/SftM...

[pjmlp]

Resource editor for dialogs isn't the same as the C++ Builder experience.

[deaddodo]

Whatever you say.

[badsectoracula]

...is correct. Visual C++ has a visual resource editor, but this isn't what C++ Builder does. C++ Builder edits live objects, you declare a class with its properties (this needs extensions to the C++ language) and during design time the object is instantiated and edited visually through the property editor ("object inspector"). This works for both visual (buttons, controls, etc) and non-visual objects.

The difference between what VC++ does and what C++ Builder (and Delphi) does is massive and at a very fundamental level.

[deaddodo]

Cool.

[jbandela1]

Visual C++ 1.0 had AppStudio

https://ia800108.us.archive.org/5/items/MicrosoftVisualStudi...

[pjmlp]

Visual editors for Windows resources in MFC aren't the same as C++ Builder VB like capabilities.