mrmiguu Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 @couttsj:> Yes, I am modifying the cSocket Class, which is a drop-in replacement for the Microsoft Winsock Control.Awesome! I am looking forward to using it in the future once you get it working. That's very neat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
couttsj Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 You can try it in VBv4 right now:http://www.planetsourcecode.com/vb/scripts/ShowCode.asp?txtCodeId=69532&lngWId=1by Oleg Gdalevichhttp://www.planet-source-code.com/vb/scripts/ShowCode.asp?txtCodeId=52072&lngWId=1By: Emiliano ScavuzzoVB6 doesn't do threading very well, so the use of callbacks is the only viable option. Each of the above authors take a slightly different approach to this, but both are drop-ins for the Microsoft Winsock Control. You will notice a performance improvement with either of them when you substitute in an existing application.J.A. Coutts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XPiXel Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikekan13 Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 > You will notice a performance improvement with either of them when you substitute in an existing application.Any reason to not use one of them? One better than the other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
couttsj Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 IMHO they are both equally as good. Emiliano based his work on the work done by Oleg Gdalevich, and added his own method of utilizing callbacks. I found Oleg's routines a little easier to follow, but Emiliano had better error routines. I used parts of both in building up my routines, as providing the same functionality as the Winsock Control was not the highest priority for me. Emiliano also went a little further in providing the code necessary to make a Control. A Control Array would be necessary when operating a multi-socket server, as each control only manages one socket.J.A. Coutts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikekan13 Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 > Emiliano also went a little further in providing the code necessary to make a Control.So Emiliano's would be the best one to use if I wanted to slam it into Eo. Also how far along are you on yours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
couttsj Posted May 7, 2011 Share Posted May 7, 2011 @Mikekan13:> So how far along are you on yours?Far enough to get a simple TCP Chat server/client routine running in both IPv4 & IPv6, but I could use some help from an experienced socket programmer.J.A. Coutts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmiguu Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 So the VB6 Winsock control basically makes controlling the Winsock API simple? I found an [article](http://vbcity.com/forums/p/27458/115174.aspx) that explained how to inject the Winsock 2 API into any VB6 application. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
couttsj Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 @MrMiguu:> So the VB6 Winsock control basically makes controlling the Winsock API simple? I found an [article](http://vbcity.com/forums/p/27458/115174.aspx) that explained how to inject the Winsock 2 API into any VB6 application.Windows has used Winsock 2 since Windows 95\. However, only the newer versions of WS2_32.dll (version 6) contain the new calls necessary to support IPv6\. Version 5 included with XP SP2 does not. Dual stack IPv4/IPv6 is included with both Vista and Win 7, and can be enabled on XP SP2\. The only way to use IPv6 if you do not have access to IPv6 transport (which is 98% of us) is to use a tunnel broker. Microsoft provides the Teredo tunnel on Vista/Win7, which to the best of my knowledge is the only one that will work behind a NAT router. The Teredo tunnel is not enabled by default, but if you want instructions on enabling it, I can provide them.J.A. Coutts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
couttsj Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 @Mikekan13:> Also how far along are you on yours?I had some trouble with the UDP part of it, but I believe it is ready for limited testing. Any volunteers?J.A. Coutts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsh Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 unless you want to keep a lid on it just release a download here and im sure a few people will try it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Refuge Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 By the look of it, it's kind of obvious why you won't have much luck with VB6 using Windows 8; [**I'll just leave this here**](http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2386343,00.asp). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsh Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Even if they do that i dont think it will kill it. Lets face it microsoft has put out a ton of crap in the past. It seems every second release or so is awful looks at windows me and vista. People will most likely just skip the release and wait for the next one. It seems microsoft screws up 50% or so of its releases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikekan13 Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 > By the look of it, it's kind of obvious why you won't have much luck with VB6 using Windows 8The best part was the comments people left him. This guy is smoking something good.I will just leave THIS here | V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Link Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 Who cares!!!! windows eight is dumb anyway! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmiguu Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 @TPK123:> Who cares!!!! windows eight is dumb anyway!A valid and much respected opinion containing enormous amounts of constructive criticism. Well done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devogen Posted June 4, 2011 Share Posted June 4, 2011 @Marsh:> Even if they do that i dont think it will kill it. Lets face it microsoft has put out a ton of crap in the past. It seems every second release or so is awful looks at windows me and vista. People will most likely just skip the release and wait for the next one. It seems microsoft screws up 50% or so of its releases.Thats pretty accurate…Windows 98SP2 : A good OSWindows Milennium: Riddled with bugs and incompatibility issues.Windows XPSP3 - a good OSWindows Vista: Terribly buggy, needed alot of workWindows 7: Since the RC candidate has given me zero grief and so far my favourite windows OS.Windows 8 : They will most likely utterly balls this up to keep with their track record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmiguu Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 @Devo:> Thats pretty accurate…> > Windows 98SP2 : A good OS> Windows Milennium: Riddled with bugs and incompatibility issues.> Windows XPSP3 - a good OS> Windows Vista: Terribly buggy, needed alot of work> Windows 7: Since the RC candidate has given me zero grief and so far my favourite windows OS.> Windows 8 : They will most likely utterly balls this up to keep with their track record.Milennium can be explained via the electronic crisis of Y2K. It's not their fault! /troll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devogen Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 @MrMiguu:> Milennium can be explained via the electronic crisis of Y2K. It's not their fault! /trollI bet microsoft would also like to put it down the to the Y2K crisis. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godlord Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 @Devo:> Thats pretty accurate…> > Windows 98SP2 : A good OS> Windows Milennium: Riddled with bugs and incompatibility issues.> Windows XPSP3 - a good OS> Windows Vista: Terribly buggy, needed alot of work> Windows 7: Since the RC candidate has given me zero grief and so far my favourite windows OS.> Windows 8 : They will most likely utterly balls this up to keep with their track record.You forgot Windows 2000 (which isn't the same as Windows 99, better known as the delayed ME), and your time line is way too linear:And it isn't accurate at all:* Windows 95, Windows 98 and Windows ME are all bugged, since they all relied on MS-DOS (I can write applications that allow all three operating systems to crash due to the lack of memory protection). Windows ME is the worst, because it simply gets worse every release (that's why Microsoft moved to the NT-series).* Windows XP has no direct relation with Windows XP x86-64 or Windows Vista, they are both based on Windows 2003 Server Edition, which is based on Windows XP.* Windows 2000 and Vista ought to be the worst out of the NT-series, because that's when the majority of models changed within the operating system (e.g. the disappearance of COM(+), new functions within the Windows API, IPv6-support, new NT-kernel functionality (If you've ever worked with the MSDN, you'll probably have noticed that most functions either exist since Windows 3.1, Windows 95 (The MSDN now assumes Windows 2000 is the denominator, so Windows 95, 98 and ME will never ever be mentioned in it again), [Windows 2000](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms738520%28v=vs.85%29.aspx) or [Windows Vista](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms682052%28v=vs.85%29.aspx)).* So Windows XP and Windows 7 are quite the opposite of the aforementioned: they have been stabilised, and new functions are barely visible ([Here](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa365915%28v=vs.85%29.aspx)'s one out of few for XP (and if you read it properly, you'll notice that it is only properly supported since Windows Vista), and for Windows 7 I haven't even noticed any, the past years I've been working with the Windows SDK). To give another example, one for Windows 7, that is: DirectX 11 requires the DirectX 10 SDK, because DirectX 11 is actually a superset of DirectX 10.1 (whereas DirectX 9 doesn't require DirectX 8, and neither does DirectX 10 require DirectX 9). On top of that: DirectX 9 works since Windows 98, whereas DirectX 10 only works since Windows Vista (even though some people managed to get it to run on Windows XP).Basing yourself on arguments is always important, and in this case the Windows SDK has proven to be a very good resource for this kind of information.Regards, Stephan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devogen Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Sorry Stephan, I should have expressly mentioned that it was accurate for _normal_ people.I knew we could count on you for a thorough post with correct timeline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godlord Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 @Devo:> Sorry Stephan, I should have expressly mentioned that it was accurate for _normal_ people.> > I knew we could count on you for a thorough post with correct timeline.Well, nevertheless our predictions are somewhat equal: Windows 8 will fail.Regards, Stephan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Refuge Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Windows ME was the best OS I've ever used.…until it mysteriously stopped working :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devogen Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I had to deploy ME on about 400 workstations.. 3 months later I had to rollback everyone to 98SE :/ I should really thank microsoft tho, they extended my contract and made me more money out of it :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drummerpete Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 @Devo:> I had to deploy ME on about 400 workstations.. 3 months later I had to rollback everyone to 98SE :/ I should really thank microsoft tho, they extended my contract and made me more money out of it :)People pay other people to install/uninstall/re-install Windows? Wha… Wh... Why... Who... *eye twitches* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now