FiveTech Support Forums

// FiveWin Visual IDE
// (c) FiveTech 1993-2000
Today I had a look at FW Visual.
The prg-files I have are from 2001 and older. Is someone still working on this IDE?

Regards,
Otto

Otto,

No, we are not currently working on it. Anyhow, its code its quite interesting to be reviewed for learning purposes.

We plan to resume our IDE development once we have completed FiveLinux and FiveMac development, so we get the right knowledge to develop a multiplatform IDE

Antonio

I just wish someone would come up with a 32 bit ( .rc ) resource editor. ALL I want for Christmas is just a 32 bit clone of Borlands Resource Workshop

I really don't care about an IDE ( although there are those that do ) .. and I prefer to write my own code ( thank you ) not have a class code generator and complicated palate properties ..

I have asked Santa .. and he agrees I am DEFINITLY on the 'good list' ..

Happy Holidays !!
Rick Lipkin
SC Dept of Health, USA

I agree with Rick a "32 bit clone of Borlands Resource Workshop" would ideal

Regards,

George

Rick, George,

But what problem do you have with Borland Resources Workshop ?

Its 16 bits but it works fine.

Antonio

I agree that Borlands Resource Workshop is ( currently ) working under Vista x86 ( not x64 ) .. but that was not early on as Vista RTM was released. Only within the past 6 months ( or so ) has Microsoft made some compatability changes.

I would like to see just a lightweight resource editor that can create ( header free ) .rc files or work from 32 bit .dll .. currently Borland's resource workshop can not work with 32 bit .dll's .. not that it is a big deal since I work in .rc.

I could care less about an icon editor or other frills nor do I want it to generate code .. just a clean header free ( text ) .rc and formated correctly !!

Rick Lipkin

Patrick Fan is still updating Visual Fivewin.
http://www.geocities.com/ksfanhk/freeware.htm#difference

I have not tried his modifications.

Gale

I have seen Patrick's site and some nice work there .. the resource editor is not bad ... however I do not want a code generator .. just write out the form to .rc ... is that so difficult to ask ????

Rick Lipkin

Antonio,

It's true Borland WS 16 bit is working fine. For me is the better Resource Editor, but Borland WS is over ten years old and sometimes there are unsolved problems with bitmaps. I mean we need a more modern and current resource editor but with the same features like Borland WS 16 bits.

George

I agree ... a newer resource editor is on my wish list also ... but I guess sometimes we don't get what we want ....

Although Borland's product works, I don't use it anymore. I use the Pelles editor to create a new RC, fine tune it by hand, and then place it into my project RC file. I just encountered far too many problems doing it any other way. I've tried some other products, but "no joy" !

My problem with the Pelles editor came down to a question of where were the log files stored because my project would auto revert after I made some changes, but after waiting for months, I never got a reply !

Oh well ....

I too would like a new resource editor, but now almost everyone is using some type of visual IDE so I would guess there isn't much of a market for a plane old resource editor. I think we would have to write one ourselves.

James

A short time ago I posted a link (A better Resource Editor?) to what I believe is a good PLAIN OLD resource editor. It does not edit bitmaps nor does it handle .RES files. When first started it defaults to writting styles as numbers but that can be changed in the "Options" "Behaviour" tab. I am told it is 32 bit application but it has not specifically been tested on Vista. The entire program is contained in a single 234KB EXE. Having never used the Borland Resource Editor, I cannot make a comparison between the two.

There appears to be a problem downloading the file though. The first time downloading it is very fast, however, the zip file doesn't download properly. The second time it takes longer but this time the entire file does download. That was my experience.

According to Enrico, he got a very bad GPF when he tried to run it. It may have been caused by the bad download. I have not had any problems using it with Win XP Pro.

I can either email it to anyone or upload it to a common site if instructions are posted as to what I have to do.

Ken

Ken,

>A short time ago I posted a link (A better Resource Editor?) to what I believe is a good PLAIN OLD resource editor.
...
>According to Enrico, he got a very bad GPF when he tried to run it. It may have been caused by the bad download. I have not had any problems using it with Win XP Pro.

I remember your posting but I did not pursue it after hearing of Enrico's problem. Perhaps it was only a bad download.

>I can either email it to anyone or upload it to a common site if instructions are posted as to what I have to do.

Please email me a copy. If anyone else wants it I can put a copy up on my website.

James

Ken

I looked at it as well .. and it totally re-formatted the .rc file in a way that was un-recognizable .. every line was a 'control' and did not use the {} as in this BRW .rc

EMPSUMM DIALOG 46, 33, 198, 156
STYLE DS_MODALFRAME | WS_POPUP | WS_CAPTION | WS_THICKFRAME
FONT 6, "MS Sans Serif"
{
LTEXT "Enter a LOW Date", -1, 10, 38, 102, 12, SS_LEFT | SS_NOPREFIX | WS_CHILD | WS_VISIBLE | WS_BORDER | WS_GROUP
EDITTEXT 110, 127, 38, 60, 12, WS_BORDER | WS_TABSTOP
LTEXT "Enter a HIGH Date", -1, 10, 53, 102, 12, SS_LEFT | SS_NOPREFIX | WS_CHILD | WS_VISIBLE | WS_BORDER | WS_GROUP
EDITTEXT 114, 127, 53, 60, 12, WS_BORDER | WS_TABSTOP
LTEXT "Print or View (P/V)", -1, 10, 74, 102, 12, SS_LEFT | SS_NOPREFIX | WS_CHILD | WS_VISIBLE | WS_BORDER | WS_GROUP
EDITTEXT 113, 127, 74, 19, 12, WS_BORDER | WS_TABSTOP
LTEXT "", 200, 8, 10, 181, 11, SS_LEFT | SS_NOPREFIX | WS_CHILD | WS_VISIBLE | WS_GROUP
PUSHBUTTON "&Run", 111, 103, 125, 37, 23
PUSHBUTTON "&Cancel", 112, 149, 125, 37, 23
CONTROL "", -1, "static", SS_BLACKRECT | WS_CHILD | WS_VISIBLE, 8, 116, 181, 1
}

Rick,

You are right but I have also seen the same format with every line begining with "Control" in some of the FWH samples as well. One other item I noted was it listed Dialogs as DIALOGEX. Not sure exactly how that differes compared to DIALOG.

It does compile with BCC32 with no problems. I have even compiled using styles as numbers with no trouble.

One problem was if I commented out 1 or more lines, BCC32 would compile correctly and ignore the commented lines but if opened and saved the file in ResEd, it would remove any such lines when the file was saved.

I have requested that comments be allowed but I am not sure it that is possible to do.