Hi,
I am currently trying to use VS V6 bscmake with WinDDK 6001. There appears
to be an incompatibility issue because bscmake reports an error in the SBR
files that it tries to process in order to generate the target BSC file.
Would this be a fair statement so far? I have almost but given up on this
combination. The only thing I have not yet tried is using the bscmake.exe
from VS2005/2008 and seeing if I get a BSC file which can then be used with
VS V6.
Can anyone tell me if WinDDK 6001 and VS 2005 is compatible in this respect?
I need to be sure before I comit to buying it.
In terms of using VS 2005 as an IDE and symbol browser would I be able to
get away with just using the standard edition of this product? Or is there
any compelling reason why I should go for the professional version?
Regards FarmerJo
VS6 is very old. I am not surprised at all that its bscmake does not grok
.sbr files from recent WDK releases. You need to upgrade your ide. I’ve used
VS8 and VS9 bscmake successfully with WDKs 6000 and 6001.
If you can figure out the differences between the various ‘editions’ of VS
you are doing better than I am. All I can figure out is that Team costs a
boatload of dollars, the others not so much.
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 5:42 AM, FarmerJo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently trying to use VS V6 bscmake with WinDDK 6001. There appears
> to be an incompatibility issue because bscmake reports an error in the SBR
> files that it tries to process in order to generate the target BSC file.
> Would this be a fair statement so far? I have almost but given up on this
> combination. The only thing I have not yet tried is using the bscmake.exe
> from VS2005/2008 and seeing if I get a BSC file which can then be used
> with
> VS V6.
>
> Can anyone tell me if WinDDK 6001 and VS 2005 is compatible in this
> respect?
> I need to be sure before I comit to buying it.
>
> In terms of using VS 2005 as an IDE and symbol browser would I be able to
> get away with just using the standard edition of this product? Or is there
> any compelling reason why I should go for the professional version?
>
> Regards FarmerJo
>
>
>
> —
> NTDEV is sponsored by OSR
>
> For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
> http://www.osr.com/seminars
>
> To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at
> http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer
>
–
Mark Roddy
I concur with Mark about the differences between versions of VS. As it
sounds like you’re going to have to consider a new editor anyway, just
as something to consider, you could use something other than BSC files
for symbols/tagging. Personally, I use SlickEdit, which builds its own
tag files. The nice thing about this is that you don’t have to run the
extra BSC steps, and that you see symbols before you compile, not that
either of these is life or death. It’s also much more capable editor,
in my opinion that supports VS key sequences, but this area is all a
matter of opinion.
Good luck,
mm
Mark Roddy wrote:
VS6 is very old. I am not surprised at all that its bscmake does not
grok .sbr files from recent WDK releases. You need to upgrade your ide.
I’ve used VS8 and VS9 bscmake successfully with WDKs 6000 and 6001.
If you can figure out the differences between the various ‘editions’ of
VS you are doing better than I am. All I can figure out is that Team
costs a boatload of dollars, the others not so much.
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 5:42 AM, FarmerJo > mailto:xxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am currently trying to use VS V6 bscmake with WinDDK 6001. There
> appears
> to be an incompatibility issue because bscmake reports an error in
> the SBR
> files that it tries to process in order to generate the target BSC file.
> Would this be a fair statement so far? I have almost but given up on
> this
> combination. The only thing I have not yet tried is using the
> bscmake.exe
> from VS2005/2008 and seeing if I get a BSC file which can then be
> used with
> VS V6.
>
> Can anyone tell me if WinDDK 6001 and VS 2005 is compatible in this
> respect?
> I need to be sure before I comit to buying it.
>
> In terms of using VS 2005 as an IDE and symbol browser would I be
> able to
> get away with just using the standard edition of this product? Or is
> there
> any compelling reason why I should go for the professional version?
>
> Regards FarmerJo
>
>
>
> —
> NTDEV is sponsored by OSR
>
> For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
> http://www.osr.com/seminars
>
> To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at
> http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer
>
>
>
>
> –
> Mark Roddy</mailto:xxxxx>
> I am not surprised at all that its bscmake does not grok .sbr files from
recent WDK releases.
Actually ? and not surprisingly ? VC6 BSC?s do not work for in VS8-9
environments either and vice versa, VS8-9 BSC’s are rejected by VC6.
I need to be sure before I comit to buying it.
Consider the express version which is free, it may well do everything you
need.
You don?t get team system (but subversion+tortoiseSVN+ankh are all free and
ankh integrates just fine into VS2005, not 2008 though, at least as of a
couple of weeks ago), you don?t need SQL server related perks etc.
I am currently trying to use VS V6 bscmake with WinDDK 6001.
Try
“C:\Program Files\Microsoft SDKs\Windows\v6.0\VC\Bin\bscmake.exe”
instead.
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Mark Roddy
Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2008 9:20 AM
To: Windows System Software Devs Interest List
Subject: Re: [ntdev] WinDDK 6001 and Visual Studio 2005 compatibility
VS6 is very old. I am not surprised at all that its bscmake does not grok
.sbr files from recent WDK releases. You need to upgrade your ide. I’ve used
VS8 and VS9 bscmake successfully with WDKs 6000 and 6001.
?
If you can figure out the differences between the various ‘editions’ of VS
you are doing better than I am. All I can figure out is that Team costs a
boatload of dollars, the others not so much.
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 5:42 AM, FarmerJo wrote:
Hi,
I am currently trying to use VS V6 bscmake with WinDDK 6001. There appears
to be an incompatibility issue because bscmake reports an error in the SBR
files that it tries to process in order to generate the target BSC file.
Would this be a fair statement so far? I have almost but given up on this
combination. The only thing I have not yet tried is using the bscmake.exe
from VS2005/2008 and seeing if I get a BSC file which can then be used with
VS V6.
Can anyone tell me if WinDDK 6001 and VS 2005 is compatible in this respect?
I need to be sure before I comit to buying it.
In terms of using VS 2005 as an IDE and symbol browser would I be able to
get away with just using the standard edition of this product? Or is there
any compelling reason why I should go for the professional version?
Regards FarmerJo
—
NTDEV is sponsored by OSR
For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars
To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at
http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer
–
Mark Roddy — NTDEV is sponsored by OSR For our schedule of WDF, WDM,
debugging and other seminars visit: http://www.osr.com/seminars To
unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at
http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer
Here is a simple experiment you can try to understand how the Visual Studio
n and the WDK/DDK nn/xx relate. Use one of the shortcuts to build a x86
(free or checked) driver. Type ‘cl’ and note the version that is displayed
on the first line or two. In Visual Studio chose the option for ‘suppress
banner’ under the C/C++ options and select ‘no’. Compile a project and look
at the output to see the version.
You will discover they do not match exactly. At some point in the
development of a new OS or a service pack, one version of the Visual Studio
command line compiler is chosen as the one that will be used to build the
OS. Early on there may be some cases where it is changed because an error
was discovered or a feature was missing, but this is only speculation on my
part. Once the OS is building correctly to include all supporting software
and in-box drivers, I think the compiler version is locked down and will
remain the same even if the VS folks are still working on a new version.
These choices were made, or so I think, because in early days going back to
DOS a new release of the compiler frequently broke some form of driver
building either with the compiler or linker missing some required feature or
some feature was broken that was unique to drivers.
VS6 has a completely different format for the bsc files as compared to later
versions of VS. They do not work with incompatible formats. SlickEdit is
very good and a new version was recently released. I believe that SlickEdit
can use bsc files as input as well as its own tagging capability.
For anyone who cares the primary difference between the various levels of
Visual Studio is that prefast for applications is only available in the Team
Editions. The database for managing projects between multiple groups is
another feature I have found useless for driver developers. I don’t know of
any group of 50 that do driver development in a connected environment where
that capability would be useful. Usually a small group of 1 to 5 developers
work on a single driver and a good source control system such as Perforce is
all that is needed.
I prefer SlickEdit and use it even when developing GUI based utilities
except for designing the windows themselves. Sometimes I even use SlickEdit
to edit the rc file to get in window objects aligned properly since I always
seem to get them off by one or two points. You have to make sure that the
rc extension is not automatically transferred to VS but is handled as a text
file by SlickEdit.
“FarmerJo” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> Hi,
>
> I am currently trying to use VS V6 bscmake with WinDDK 6001. There appears
> to be an incompatibility issue because bscmake reports an error in the SBR
> files that it tries to process in order to generate the target BSC file.
> Would this be a fair statement so far? I have almost but given up on this
> combination. The only thing I have not yet tried is using the bscmake.exe
> from VS2005/2008 and seeing if I get a BSC file which can then be used
> with VS V6.
>
> Can anyone tell me if WinDDK 6001 and VS 2005 is compatible in this
> respect? I need to be sure before I comit to buying it.
>
> In terms of using VS 2005 as an IDE and symbol browser would I be able to
> get away with just using the standard edition of this product? Or is there
> any compelling reason why I should go for the professional version?
>
> Regards FarmerJo
>
>
David:
You’re correct - SlickEdit can indeed use BSC files. If you don’t mind,
what version of SlickEdit do you use, and how well does it handle
‘Intellisense’ or whatever you call it? The reason I ask is that Doron
and I were talking about SlickEdit last week, and I believe that we
agreed that SlickEdit tends to vary in quality quite a bit from release
to release, and I’ve had problems with CodeSense/Intellisense with the
version I use 10.0.3.
Thanks,
mm
David Craig wrote:
Here is a simple experiment you can try to understand how the Visual Studio
n and the WDK/DDK nn/xx relate. Use one of the shortcuts to build a x86
(free or checked) driver. Type ‘cl’ and note the version that is displayed
on the first line or two. In Visual Studio chose the option for ‘suppress
banner’ under the C/C++ options and select ‘no’. Compile a project and look
at the output to see the version.
You will discover they do not match exactly. At some point in the
development of a new OS or a service pack, one version of the Visual Studio
command line compiler is chosen as the one that will be used to build the
OS. Early on there may be some cases where it is changed because an error
was discovered or a feature was missing, but this is only speculation on my
part. Once the OS is building correctly to include all supporting software
and in-box drivers, I think the compiler version is locked down and will
remain the same even if the VS folks are still working on a new version.
These choices were made, or so I think, because in early days going back to
DOS a new release of the compiler frequently broke some form of driver
building either with the compiler or linker missing some required feature or
some feature was broken that was unique to drivers.
VS6 has a completely different format for the bsc files as compared to later
versions of VS. They do not work with incompatible formats. SlickEdit is
very good and a new version was recently released. I believe that SlickEdit
can use bsc files as input as well as its own tagging capability.
For anyone who cares the primary difference between the various levels of
Visual Studio is that prefast for applications is only available in the Team
Editions. The database for managing projects between multiple groups is
another feature I have found useless for driver developers. I don’t know of
any group of 50 that do driver development in a connected environment where
that capability would be useful. Usually a small group of 1 to 5 developers
work on a single driver and a good source control system such as Perforce is
all that is needed.
I prefer SlickEdit and use it even when developing GUI based utilities
except for designing the windows themselves. Sometimes I even use SlickEdit
to edit the rc file to get in window objects aligned properly since I always
seem to get them off by one or two points. You have to make sure that the
rc extension is not automatically transferred to VS but is handled as a text
file by SlickEdit.
“FarmerJo” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am currently trying to use VS V6 bscmake with WinDDK 6001. There appears
>> to be an incompatibility issue because bscmake reports an error in the SBR
>> files that it tries to process in order to generate the target BSC file.
>> Would this be a fair statement so far? I have almost but given up on this
>> combination. The only thing I have not yet tried is using the bscmake.exe
>> from VS2005/2008 and seeing if I get a BSC file which can then be used
>> with VS V6.
>>
>> Can anyone tell me if WinDDK 6001 and VS 2005 is compatible in this
>> respect? I need to be sure before I comit to buying it.
>>
>> In terms of using VS 2005 as an IDE and symbol browser would I be able to
>> get away with just using the standard edition of this product? Or is there
>> any compelling reason why I should go for the professional version?
>>
>> Regards FarmerJo
>>
>>
>
>
>
Hi,
Thanks for all the replies.
I have now downloaded the free Visual Studio 2005 Express edition and it
does everything that I need it to including symbol browsing etc. It’s
version of bscmake is compatible with version 6001 of the DDK.
Although the BSC file is generated it does not appear that it is necessary
to include it in the project as far as I can tell. Can anyone tell me for
sure if I need to?
Regards FarmerJo
> Although the BSC file is generated it does not appear that it is
necessary to include it in the project as far as I can tell. Can anyone
tell me for sure if I need to?
To be very honest with you, I prefer using Visual Assist X. It’s perfect with drivers, as it parses the headers that you give in the project options. So instead of relying on the browsle files, you get a much improved IntelliSense and a lot of other goodies.
// Oliver
I have been using 2007 for quite a while. I recently upgraded to 2008 but
it is only on my personal notebook while I do most of my programming on the
company notebook where the 2007 version is running. That notebook is messed
up and I need to get IT to reload a standard image on it, but I have been
busy recently and haven’t had time to get it redone. It takes a while to
add the other stuff I need such as SlickEdit, windbg, and several packages
for various buss capture cards such as VMetro, Catc, etc. I also want my
Total Commander, WinHex, FireFox (standard IT image includes one, but
usually out of date), and all the Windows Updates since the standard image
was done. I think it is over 100 now and about 4 or 5 reboots. I also need
Perforce - P4V and P4Win and two or three WDKs/DDKs. NDIS 5 docs are much
better in the last DDK than in the WDK where the NDIS 6 docs get in the way.
I have to do both, so I need both but without any mixing up of what works
where.
I can right-click on a function or structure name and jump to the definition
of it easily and if you use the two extra mouse buttons to do forward and
backwards (internet style) to the place you started. There are keyboard
shortcuts for these too. You can also get references for an item with
another choice on the right-click menu. Just hovering above a data item
will shows its definition and if you put comments on the same line, you will
see those too. I like to use the offset addresses on the memory mapped IO
registers of the chip so I can reference the programmer’s reference as
needed. SlickEdit works well with DDKBUILD from Hollis Tech.
“Martin O’Brien” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> David:
>
> You’re correct - SlickEdit can indeed use BSC files. If you don’t mind,
> what version of SlickEdit do you use, and how well does it handle
> ‘Intellisense’ or whatever you call it? The reason I ask is that Doron
> and I were talking about SlickEdit last week, and I believe that we agreed
> that SlickEdit tends to vary in quality quite a bit from release to
> release, and I’ve had problems with CodeSense/Intellisense with the
> version I use 10.0.3.
>
> Thanks,
>
> mm
>
>
>
> David Craig wrote:
>> Here is a simple experiment you can try to understand how the Visual
>> Studio n and the WDK/DDK nn/xx relate. Use one of the shortcuts to build
>> a x86 (free or checked) driver. Type ‘cl’ and note the version that is
>> displayed on the first line or two. In Visual Studio chose the option
>> for ‘suppress banner’ under the C/C++ options and select ‘no’. Compile a
>> project and look at the output to see the version.
>>
>> You will discover they do not match exactly. At some point in the
>> development of a new OS or a service pack, one version of the Visual
>> Studio command line compiler is chosen as the one that will be used to
>> build the OS. Early on there may be some cases where it is changed
>> because an error was discovered or a feature was missing, but this is
>> only speculation on my part. Once the OS is building correctly to
>> include all supporting software and in-box drivers, I think the compiler
>> version is locked down and will remain the same even if the VS folks are
>> still working on a new version. These choices were made, or so I think,
>> because in early days going back to DOS a new release of the compiler
>> frequently broke some form of driver building either with the compiler or
>> linker missing some required feature or some feature was broken that was
>> unique to drivers.
>>
>> VS6 has a completely different format for the bsc files as compared to
>> later versions of VS. They do not work with incompatible formats.
>> SlickEdit is very good and a new version was recently released. I
>> believe that SlickEdit can use bsc files as input as well as its own
>> tagging capability.
>>
>> For anyone who cares the primary difference between the various levels of
>> Visual Studio is that prefast for applications is only available in the
>> Team Editions. The database for managing projects between multiple
>> groups is another feature I have found useless for driver developers. I
>> don’t know of any group of 50 that do driver development in a connected
>> environment where that capability would be useful. Usually a small group
>> of 1 to 5 developers work on a single driver and a good source control
>> system such as Perforce is all that is needed.
>>
>> I prefer SlickEdit and use it even when developing GUI based utilities
>> except for designing the windows themselves. Sometimes I even use
>> SlickEdit to edit the rc file to get in window objects aligned properly
>> since I always seem to get them off by one or two points. You have to
>> make sure that the rc extension is not automatically transferred to VS
>> but is handled as a text file by SlickEdit.
>>
>> “FarmerJo” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am currently trying to use VS V6 bscmake with WinDDK 6001. There
>>> appears to be an incompatibility issue because bscmake reports an error
>>> in the SBR files that it tries to process in order to generate the
>>> target BSC file. Would this be a fair statement so far? I have almost
>>> but given up on this combination. The only thing I have not yet tried is
>>> using the bscmake.exe from VS2005/2008 and seeing if I get a BSC file
>>> which can then be used with VS V6.
>>>
>>> Can anyone tell me if WinDDK 6001 and VS 2005 is compatible in this
>>> respect? I need to be sure before I comit to buying it.
>>>
>>> In terms of using VS 2005 as an IDE and symbol browser would I be able
>>> to get away with just using the standard edition of this product? Or is
>>> there any compelling reason why I should go for the professional
>>> version?
>>>
>>> Regards FarmerJo
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
VS 05 and 08 do a pretty good job on their own with intellisense or whatever
it is called outside of bsc files. (You do have to tell the project which
#defines have what values.) However if you want caller/callee relationships
and accurate references, including the bsc file (any one of them from
various platform builds) in your project will help.
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 6:52 PM, FarmerJo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for all the replies.
>
> I have now downloaded the free Visual Studio 2005 Express edition and it
> does everything that I need it to including symbol browsing etc. It’s
> version of bscmake is compatible with version 6001 of the DDK.
>
> Although the BSC file is generated it does not appear that it is necessary
> to include it in the project as far as I can tell. Can anyone tell me for
> sure if I need to?
>
> Regards FarmerJo
>
>
>
> —
> NTDEV is sponsored by OSR
>
> For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
> http://www.osr.com/seminars
>
> To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at
> http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer
>
–
Mark Roddy
SlickEdit 13.0.0.0 thus far appears to be acceptable.
–
The personal opinion of
Gary G. Little
“Martin O’Brien” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> David:
>
> You’re correct - SlickEdit can indeed use BSC files. If you don’t mind,
> what version of SlickEdit do you use, and how well does it handle
> ‘Intellisense’ or whatever you call it? The reason I ask is that Doron
> and I were talking about SlickEdit last week, and I believe that we agreed
> that SlickEdit tends to vary in quality quite a bit from release to
> release, and I’ve had problems with CodeSense/Intellisense with the
> version I use 10.0.3.
>
> Thanks,
>
> mm
>
>
>
> David Craig wrote:
>> Here is a simple experiment you can try to understand how the Visual
>> Studio n and the WDK/DDK nn/xx relate. Use one of the shortcuts to build
>> a x86 (free or checked) driver. Type ‘cl’ and note the version that is
>> displayed on the first line or two. In Visual Studio chose the option
>> for ‘suppress banner’ under the C/C++ options and select ‘no’. Compile a
>> project and look at the output to see the version.
>>
>> You will discover they do not match exactly. At some point in the
>> development of a new OS or a service pack, one version of the Visual
>> Studio command line compiler is chosen as the one that will be used to
>> build the OS. Early on there may be some cases where it is changed
>> because an error was discovered or a feature was missing, but this is
>> only speculation on my part. Once the OS is building correctly to
>> include all supporting software and in-box drivers, I think the compiler
>> version is locked down and will remain the same even if the VS folks are
>> still working on a new version. These choices were made, or so I think,
>> because in early days going back to DOS a new release of the compiler
>> frequently broke some form of driver building either with the compiler or
>> linker missing some required feature or some feature was broken that was
>> unique to drivers.
>>
>> VS6 has a completely different format for the bsc files as compared to
>> later versions of VS. They do not work with incompatible formats.
>> SlickEdit is very good and a new version was recently released. I
>> believe that SlickEdit can use bsc files as input as well as its own
>> tagging capability.
>>
>> For anyone who cares the primary difference between the various levels of
>> Visual Studio is that prefast for applications is only available in the
>> Team Editions. The database for managing projects between multiple
>> groups is another feature I have found useless for driver developers. I
>> don’t know of any group of 50 that do driver development in a connected
>> environment where that capability would be useful. Usually a small group
>> of 1 to 5 developers work on a single driver and a good source control
>> system such as Perforce is all that is needed.
>>
>> I prefer SlickEdit and use it even when developing GUI based utilities
>> except for designing the windows themselves. Sometimes I even use
>> SlickEdit to edit the rc file to get in window objects aligned properly
>> since I always seem to get them off by one or two points. You have to
>> make sure that the rc extension is not automatically transferred to VS
>> but is handled as a text file by SlickEdit.
>>
>> “FarmerJo” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am currently trying to use VS V6 bscmake with WinDDK 6001. There
>>> appears to be an incompatibility issue because bscmake reports an error
>>> in the SBR files that it tries to process in order to generate the
>>> target BSC file. Would this be a fair statement so far? I have almost
>>> but given up on this combination. The only thing I have not yet tried is
>>> using the bscmake.exe from VS2005/2008 and seeing if I get a BSC file
>>> which can then be used with VS V6.
>>>
>>> Can anyone tell me if WinDDK 6001 and VS 2005 is compatible in this
>>> respect? I need to be sure before I comit to buying it.
>>>
>>> In terms of using VS 2005 as an IDE and symbol browser would I be able
>>> to get away with just using the standard edition of this product? Or is
>>> there any compelling reason why I should go for the professional
>>> version?
>>>
>>> Regards FarmerJo
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
When using VS up through 2008, I have to concur with Oliver. VAX (Visual
Assist X) makes Visual Studio much more pleasant. Were I left to my own,
that is all that I would use, but we have curmudgeons in remote locations
that think SlickEdit is better, so for compatibility sake I have had to use
SE. At home, and when I pay it however, I only use VS with the latest VaX.
–
The personal opinion of
Gary G. Little
“Oliver Schneider” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>> Although the BSC file is generated it does not appear that it is
>> necessary to include it in the project as far as I can tell. Can anyone
>> tell me for sure if I need to?
>
> To be very honest with you, I prefer using Visual Assist X. It’s perfect
> with drivers, as it parses the headers that you give in the project
> options. So instead of relying on the browsle files, you get a much
> improved IntelliSense and a lot of other goodies.
>
>
> // Oliver
>
Thanks, Gary. Even though I’m a SE user, I feel for you, because there is nothing worse than having to use an editor you don’t like.
mm
Gary G. Little wrote:
SlickEdit 13.0.0.0 thus far appears to be acceptable.
While, I can’t say I don’t like SE, I really don’t see that it is worth the
expense. I get VS with my MSDN subscription and have found it quite
acceptable when used with the latest VaX. VaX only adds about $50 and gives
you nearly all of the “functionality” of SE. The one thing I have seen SE do
that can be difficult in VS is resolve symbols when a build breaks. That can
be the most frustrating thing I have found is to be fixing a build and
search for a symbol that VS cannot find because the build broke – Catch-22.
The VaX reference and re-factor will in most instances find what VS won’t,
and SE does find them also, but I have had SE fail to find symbols and
references at inconvenient times.
I guess I’m to much a Scot … I hate to pay over $2K for VS, to have to pay
another $300 for the editor du jour which bottom line is not all that much
better than what I get for $2K, especially when there is a $50 add on that
gives me all the functionality I need.
–
The personal opinion of
Gary G. Little
“Martin O’Brien” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> Thanks, Gary. Even though I’m a SE user, I feel for you, because there is
> nothing worse than having to use an editor you don’t like.
>
> mm
>
>
> Gary G. Little wrote:
>> SlickEdit 13.0.0.0 thus far appears to be acceptable.
>>
>
I’ve never used Vax; actually, I had never even heard of it until the other day on this thread. I’ll have to take a look, because
although I really like SE, it does indeed do some damn strange things with symbols sometimes. That is actually what I was asking
Doron about, and if I recall correctly, he said that he had not seen these issues, which made me think it was a version specific thing.
Thanks,
mm
Gary G. Little wrote:
While, I can’t say I don’t like SE, I really don’t see that it is worth the
expense. I get VS with my MSDN subscription and have found it quite
acceptable when used with the latest VaX. VaX only adds about $50 and gives
you nearly all of the “functionality” of SE. The one thing I have seen SE do
that can be difficult in VS is resolve symbols when a build breaks. That can
be the most frustrating thing I have found is to be fixing a build and
search for a symbol that VS cannot find because the build broke – Catch-22.
The VaX reference and re-factor will in most instances find what VS won’t,
and SE does find them also, but I have had SE fail to find symbols and
references at inconvenient times.
I guess I’m to much a Scot … I hate to pay over $2K for VS, to have to pay
another $300 for the editor du jour which bottom line is not all that much
better than what I get for $2K, especially when there is a $50 add on that
gives me all the functionality I need.
Every worker should choose the tools that they find makes the job easiest for them.
The VS editor makes me insane… positively insane. For the LIFE of me, I can’t understand (or seem to be able to alter) its indenting strategies. I find the accelerator keys inscrutable. The auto-formatting options (for C) are not what I would prefer, and don’t seem to be sufficiently tailorable.
Then again, I’m still using CodeWright…
Peter
OSR
CodeWright was what I used before SlickEdit. Didn’t Borland kill it? I know that they gave it their best effort. Maybe they just
removed the source code, which I know I wasn’t happy with, because I had customized it in a couple of places, not that any of them
were exactly imperative. When the source was still distributed with it, I loved CodeWright.
mm
xxxxx@osr.com wrote:
Every worker should choose the tools that they find makes the job easiest for them.
The VS editor makes me insane… positively insane. For the LIFE of me, I can’t understand (or seem to be able to alter) its indenting strategies. I find the accelerator keys inscrutable. The auto-formatting options (for C) are not what I would prefer, and don’t seem to be sufficiently tailorable.
Then again, I’m still using CodeWright…
Peter
OSR
Can’t beat the editor comfort zone. Always hated the VS editor since
it always seems to think it knows better than you do on how things
should be formatted. And anything that still works with some of the
old WordStar shortcuts reminds me of bad days and the Borland Turbo
Pascal editor.
I use Zeus Edit, a very good Windows emulator of Brief from the old
DOS days !!! I haven’t had to learn new key strokes since about 1991.
Got most of the DDK functions and structures I generally use imported
as key words to appear in different colours, had all my defaults
propagated from one version to another since before my hair went
grey. Editors really are a prime example of “If it ain’t
broke. Don’t fix it.” 
Mark.
At 16:13 22/04/2008, Martin O’Brien wrote:
CodeWright was what I used before SlickEdit. Didn’t Borland kill
it? I know that they gave it their best effort. Maybe they just
removed the source code, which I know I wasn’t happy with, because I
had customized it in a couple of places, not that any of them were
exactly imperative. When the source was still distributed with it,
I loved CodeWright.
mm
xxxxx@osr.com wrote:
>Every worker should choose the tools that they find makes the job
>easiest for them.
>The VS editor makes me insane… positively insane. For the LIFE
>of me, I can’t understand (or seem to be able to alter) its
>indenting strategies. I find the accelerator keys
>inscrutable. The auto-formatting options (for C) are not what I
>would prefer, and don’t seem to be sufficiently tailorable.
>Then again, I’m still using CodeWright…
>Peter
>OSR
I have 11.0 right now. Debating if I want to get the latest. 11 was certainly a regression from 8.0 though, a bit slower and hangs more often.
d
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com [mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Gary G. Little
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 7:11 AM
To: Windows System Software Devs Interest List
Subject: Re:[ntdev] WinDDK 6001 and Visual Studio 2005 compatibility
SlickEdit 13.0.0.0 thus far appears to be acceptable.
–
The personal opinion of
Gary G. Little
“Martin O’Brien” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> David:
>
> You’re correct - SlickEdit can indeed use BSC files. If you don’t mind,
> what version of SlickEdit do you use, and how well does it handle
> ‘Intellisense’ or whatever you call it? The reason I ask is that Doron
> and I were talking about SlickEdit last week, and I believe that we agreed
> that SlickEdit tends to vary in quality quite a bit from release to
> release, and I’ve had problems with CodeSense/Intellisense with the
> version I use 10.0.3.
>
> Thanks,
>
> mm
>
>
>
> David Craig wrote:
>> Here is a simple experiment you can try to understand how the Visual
>> Studio n and the WDK/DDK nn/xx relate. Use one of the shortcuts to build
>> a x86 (free or checked) driver. Type ‘cl’ and note the version that is
>> displayed on the first line or two. In Visual Studio chose the option
>> for ‘suppress banner’ under the C/C++ options and select ‘no’. Compile a
>> project and look at the output to see the version.
>>
>> You will discover they do not match exactly. At some point in the
>> development of a new OS or a service pack, one version of the Visual
>> Studio command line compiler is chosen as the one that will be used to
>> build the OS. Early on there may be some cases where it is changed
>> because an error was discovered or a feature was missing, but this is
>> only speculation on my part. Once the OS is building correctly to
>> include all supporting software and in-box drivers, I think the compiler
>> version is locked down and will remain the same even if the VS folks are
>> still working on a new version. These choices were made, or so I think,
>> because in early days going back to DOS a new release of the compiler
>> frequently broke some form of driver building either with the compiler or
>> linker missing some required feature or some feature was broken that was
>> unique to drivers.
>>
>> VS6 has a completely different format for the bsc files as compared to
>> later versions of VS. They do not work with incompatible formats.
>> SlickEdit is very good and a new version was recently released. I
>> believe that SlickEdit can use bsc files as input as well as its own
>> tagging capability.
>>
>> For anyone who cares the primary difference between the various levels of
>> Visual Studio is that prefast for applications is only available in the
>> Team Editions. The database for managing projects between multiple
>> groups is another feature I have found useless for driver developers. I
>> don’t know of any group of 50 that do driver development in a connected
>> environment where that capability would be useful. Usually a small group
>> of 1 to 5 developers work on a single driver and a good source control
>> system such as Perforce is all that is needed.
>>
>> I prefer SlickEdit and use it even when developing GUI based utilities
>> except for designing the windows themselves. Sometimes I even use
>> SlickEdit to edit the rc file to get in window objects aligned properly
>> since I always seem to get them off by one or two points. You have to
>> make sure that the rc extension is not automatically transferred to VS
>> but is handled as a text file by SlickEdit.
>>
>> “FarmerJo” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am currently trying to use VS V6 bscmake with WinDDK 6001. There
>>> appears to be an incompatibility issue because bscmake reports an error
>>> in the SBR files that it tries to process in order to generate the
>>> target BSC file. Would this be a fair statement so far? I have almost
>>> but given up on this combination. The only thing I have not yet tried is
>>> using the bscmake.exe from VS2005/2008 and seeing if I get a BSC file
>>> which can then be used with VS V6.
>>>
>>> Can anyone tell me if WinDDK 6001 and VS 2005 is compatible in this
>>> respect? I need to be sure before I comit to buying it.
>>>
>>> In terms of using VS 2005 as an IDE and symbol browser would I be able
>>> to get away with just using the standard edition of this product? Or is
>>> there any compelling reason why I should go for the professional
>>> version?
>>>
>>> Regards FarmerJo
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
—
NTDEV is sponsored by OSR
For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars
To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer