Compatibility with other libraries
Printed From: Codejock Forums
Category: Codejock Products
Forum Name: Toolkit Pro
Forum Description: Topics Related to Codejock Toolkit Pro
URL: http://forum.codejock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=15933
Printed Date: 21 June 2025 at 2:24pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Compatibility with other libraries
Posted By: feffe
Subject: Compatibility with other libraries
Date Posted: 29 December 2009 at 5:12am
|
Hi,
I'm using CodeJock for changing the GUI of an old application that uses StingRay libraries (for the views mainly).
As I can see, sometimes there are a few problems if I use both products at the same time (problems in the views visualization).
So, is it stupid if I use MFC FeaturePack for the Ribbon and CMainFrame, while using Codejock for skinning the dialogs
when they do modal?
Horrible mix?
 |
Replies:
Posted By: znakeeye
Date Posted: 29 December 2009 at 6:18am
|
Why not make an investigation and let us know :)
Personally, I would not want to bloat my MFC-applications with 4MB ADDITIONAL ribbon-images and sh*t. ------------- PokerMemento - http://www.pokermemento.com/ |
Posted By: feffe
Date Posted: 29 December 2009 at 6:31am
|
Yes, this is a problem... So, what would you suggest? CodeJock has more functionalities I think... |
Posted By: znakeeye
Date Posted: 29 December 2009 at 8:16am
|
The MFC ribbon itself is not an alternative. Its codebase, however, is an alternative. So, basically, it boils down to a choice between Codejock and BCG. You probably would not want to use both! If you are already using Codejock, then stick to it (it's better anyway). ------------- PokerMemento - http://www.pokermemento.com/ |
Posted By: feffe
Date Posted: 30 December 2009 at 4:27am
|
What do you exactly mean with "MFC Ribbon is not an alternative - codebase is an alternative"? In particular, it seems to me that MFC does not have classes for changing the style of dialogs and dialog controls...
Is it true? This could be a problem... Skinning the dialog with CodeJock is very easy and fast...
|
Posted By: znakeeye
Date Posted: 01 January 2010 at 6:41am
|
The MFC ribbon is based on BCGSoft's ribbon-code (which is probably the worst decision ever made by Microsoft). MFC is not regularly updated so you can expect the MFC ribbon to have bugs that will not get fixed any time soon. Also, it's not commonly used (try googling and you'll notice!). Both Codejock and BCGSoft update their libraries on a regular basis. If I would choose a ribbon library, I would choose either Codejock, BCGSoft or any other complete library. Codejock is the best, so... is it really such a hard decision?
MFC does not include a skinning engine. Codejock does. Hmmm :) ------------- PokerMemento - http://www.pokermemento.com/ |
Posted By: feffe
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 8:00am
|
Yes, I understand.
But the problem is that my application uses Stingray libraries, and I've found some compatibility problems between
Codejock and Stingray.
So, in this particular case I was looking for an alternative....
uhmmm..... boh!
|
Posted By: SuperMario
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 1:53pm
| What compatibility problems? What are you trying to do? |
Posted By: feffe
Date Posted: 12 January 2010 at 2:52am
|
When I inherit CMainFrame from CXTPMDIFrameWnd some OLE drag&drop functions
we've already written seem to have problems; they don't work.
It seems that we need a "MFC-pure" class for CMainFrame.
|