Will Learning C++ Help for Building Fast/No-Additional-Requirements Desktop Applications?

Question

Will learning C++ help me build native applications with good speed? Will it help me as a programmer, and what are the other benefits?

The reason why I want to learn C++ is because I'm disappointed with the UI performances of applications built on top of JVM and .NET. They feel slow, and start slow too. Of course, a really bad programmer can create a slower and sluggish application using C++ too, but I'm not considering that case.

One of my favorite Windows utility application is Launchy. And in the Readme.pdf file, the author of the program wrote this:

0.6 This is the first C++ release. As I became frustrated with C#’s large .NET framework requirements and users lack of desire to install it, I decided to switch back to the faster language.

I totally agree with the author of Launchy about the .NET framework requirement or even a JRE requirement for desktop applications. Let alone the specific version of them. And some of the best and my favorite desktop applications don't need .NET or Java to run. They just run after installing. Are they mostly built using C++? Is C++ the only option for good and fast GUI based applications?

And, I'm also very interested in hearing the other benefits of learning C++.

Answer 1

As always. It depends. As long as you stay away from microsofts large Frameworks, as MFC, .net etc your applications can be blazing fast, but hard to code. Your benefit: You will really learn how windows is working behind its nice(?)surface. Just look into the initialisation code for COM-Objects and you know what I mean. You will never see such things in VB or C#

You have to program each button, each window and each control by yourself, sending silly window messages, however your applications are small, very small. This is an forgotten art:

Write small, fast programs

Good luck!

Answer 2

You will hate my answer:

The biggest bottlenecks in GUI development usually are not because of the language. After all most of the time in most applications the UI is idling, waiting for some user input. I can hear your screams already, but I said in most of the apps.

Let's put it this way: I am pretty sure that one can design a good UI on top of the .Net CLR. Learning C++ is a good thing, but will not solve the inherent problems of developing a good UI.

Answer 3

If you want to build Windows applications that will run without frameworks such as .NET or virtual machines/interpreters, then your only really viable choices are going to be Visual Basic or C/C++

I've written some small Windows apps before in C++ code, and there is definitely a benefit in terms of speed and ease of deployment, at the expense of difficulty going up for development. C++ can be very fast, natively compiles, has many modern language features, and wide support. The trade off is that it's likely that you'll need to write more code in certain situations, or seek out libraries like Boost that provide the functionality you're after.

As a programmer, working in C++ and especially in C is good experience for helping you understand something just a tad closer to the machine than say, .NET, Java or a scripting language like VBScript, Python, Perl etc. It won't necessarily make you a better programmer, but if you are open to learning new lessons from it you may find that it helps you gain a new perspective on software. After all, most of the frameworks and systems you depend on are written in pure C, so it will never hurt you to understand the foundations. C++ is a different animal from straight C, but if you develop in C++ for Windows you'll likely find yourself working in a mix of C and C++ to work with Windows APIs, so it will have a trickle-down effect.

Answer 4

Yes and no. It's all about optimization...And since C++ allows you to work on a lower level C++ is one of the best languages to write fast applications. However those low-level mechanics implemented in C++ could be very annoying if you're used to more abstract approaches to OOP. Testing your software in C++ is usually a long process. If you are looking for speed anyway, C++ would definitely be one of the best choices.

Answer 5

yep, C++ is absolutely great. Check Qt. It has a great Python binding too, so you can easily prototype in Python, and when/if you need extra performance, porting to C++ is a mostly 1:1 translation.

But in fact, writing C++ isn't so hard either when you have a great platform, the worst part is writing all the class declarations :-)

Answer 6

If you're committed to learning the raw, gritty details of Win32, then C++ will get you there. If you're not, then you'll end up using a bunch of wrappers anyway. For something like a small utility or especially something like a shell extension (where trying to use .NET will cause you problems anyway), C++ will let you write effective code with the absolute minimum in external dependencies. For a larger app, YMMV - a lot of the UI sluggishness out there comes from poor design: naive algorithms, an unwillingness to spin off non-trivial operations onto separate thread(s), reliance on badly-written 3rd-party components instead of custom controls... Mistakes easily made in any language.

Answer 7

Here is my honest answer to this.

First, I think every programmer should learn C/C++ just for the fact that by learning C++ you learn about programming. It is a systems-level language. You have to consider the finer details of memory management and so forth. I am shocked at how many programmers do not understand the foundational aspects of a programming language or computer system. By learning C/C++, you force yourself to understand programming at a more intimate level. On top of that, if you learn how to program in C/C++, you can program in almost anything.

That isn't to say C/C++ is always the right tool for the job. It can be a total pain to debug and take longer to write more meaningful code. However, it is perfect for those situations where you need absolute control of how a program executes.

This goes to say, I don't prefer C/C++ for UI programming. You still have to use a windowing framework specific to the OS you run on (MFC,Win32,Motif,GTK,QT,etc.). These frameworks don't lend themselves to easy learning curves. For at least Windows development, .NET is really the future of UI development (even though surprisingly MFC got a major overhaul for Vista that does stuff .NET doesn't even do yet). If you write your UI in .NET, it is easier to maintain and for others to maintain.

I typically write my UI in .NET and backend in C++.

Answer 8

I wrote C++ windows apps for 10 years and switched to c# about 2 years ago to work on the latest product. I am embarrassed by how pathetic the C# app is. It takes 20 seconds to start up, you have to wait a second or so for it to switch between screens. I've used some third party GUI control library, and that leaks memory like a sieve! My app runs at 150 meg, and its doing hardly anything.

I am looking to go back to C++.

You can use MFC, it will be far quicker than .Net. Or, if you really want to burn, check out WTL - aLthough, there's not much documentation for that. I suggest you go with either MFC or Qt because you'll find plenty of good information and tutorials for them.

I can see that C# can be quicker to develop with, and maybe in some future version it will be quicker and smaller.

Answer 9

C++ will indeed potentially get you a leaner, meaner and faster application (if you do it right).

However, the .NET framework is built for comfort from a developer point of view; a vast improvement over Win32 API or MFC, which may seem like hard work in comparison, So consider how you will implement the aspects for which your application depends on .NET (there are other frameworks available that may be easier than MFC or Win32 API), and also consider the costs and license issues of using such frameworks; for example the free VC++ Express Edition for example does not include MFC support.

If you know where you application is sluggish, C++/CLI may be a solution; allowing you to mix managed and native code to accelerate the parts that need it. However if it is the GUI that is intrinsically slow rather than the application processing; this may not be a useful path.