Hi I’m Pat Brenner, a developer on the Visual C++ libraries team. I’m pleased to give you a sneak peek at a major MFC update we’ve been working on. Since we’re adding a number of cool new user interface components to MFC, this blog post is going to be graphics heavy. I’d much rather show you some of these components than just describe them! I hope you enjoy this quick tour through the new portions of the library.
Modern user interface elements
This update to the MFC library will enable developers to build modern user interfaces with support for the Office 2007 Ribbon Bar, Office-style menus, Visual Studio-style docking toolbars, tabbed documents and much more. All of the components included in the update will run on Windows 2000 and above.
Let’s take a look at some of the Office 2007 Ribbon Bar support. Below is an image of an MFC application built with the Office look and feel:
The ribbon support includes support for the application button (the large round button at the top left), the quick access toolbar (the small set of tools just to the right of the application button) and the standard ribbon components. Each tab on the ribbon (e.g., the “Home” tab above) allows access to a category of tools. Each category is divided up into a set of panels (e.g., “Clipboard” and “Font” above) and each panel contains a set of ribbon elements. These ribbon elements can have a wide variety of styles—I’ll go into more detail about these later.
Perhaps many of you would like to build applications that utilize some of the functionality we’ve had in Visual Studio. For example, one of the most requested features is support for the smart docking we added in Visual Studio 2005. With this new release, all the cool user interface features you’ve seen in the past versions of Visual Studio are at your disposal.
Let’s take a look at some of the Visual Studio support. Below is an image of an MFC application built with the Visual Studio look and feel:
MFC now implements its own menu bar and toolbar, which is fully customizable like the Visual Studio toolbar and menu bar. This means that buttons can be moved between toolbars, and even from the toolbar to the menu bar and vice versa. Custom toolbars can be created, and commands can be added to them. And the images for the individual toolbar buttons can even be changed, and custom images can be created and used. Support for docking panes is also included—these panes can be grouped into one docking frame as above, they can be floating as well as docked, and they support auto-hide mode like in Visual Studio, so a docked pane will slide out from the edge of the frame when its tab is hovered over, mimicking the Visual Studio behavior. There is also support for tabbed MDI documents (which can be grouped) like in Visual Studio.
In addition to all the features supporting Office, Internet Explorer and Visual Studio “look and feel” there are a number of built-in cool elements you can use in the ribbon in your application. In the images below, we provide a quick visual introduction to what’s included in the library. The images come from the RibbonGadgets example that ships with the library.
In the image below you can see large and small buttons, as well as check boxes. The buttons can be simple (so they just respond to a click), or they can drop down a menu or be a split button which responds to the click or drops a menu depending on the click location.
In the image below you can see what we call palette buttons. These can be a set of buttons that have associated images, so the user can see what he will get when he clicks on a button in the palette. These palettes can be embedded in the ribbon, or they can be dropped down from a button in a window which can be resized dynamically by the user.
In the image below you can see a variety of color choosers. These can be embedded in the ribbon, or they can be attached to a button. The table of colors associated with the chooser can be customized in your application. There is a color picker dialog which offers even more flexibility, including the ability to choose the color of any pixel on the screen and use that color.
In the image below you can see groups of commands. A ribbon group can be built from an existing toolbar, so if your application has a large number of toolbars, you can place them on the ribbon with ease.
In the image below you can see support for edit boxes, combo boxes and spin controls, as well as the font picker control, which can display the font names in the font (as in Word) so you get an instant preview of the font appearance.
Below you can see a few more ribbon elements. Several of these, including the progress indicators and the links and sliders, actually make more sense on the ribbon status bar, which you can see in the first image at the top of this article.
Powerful application wizard
We’ve also beefed up the MFC Application Wizard (see the images below) quite a bit to enable easy use of these new features in MFC. We’ve added a couple of options to the “Project Style” category which will allow you to build a project that looks something like Visual Studio or an Office application by default. We’ve added the option to use tabbed MDI document windows rather than the old MDI style. And we’ve added the ability to choose the look and feel of your application with the “Visual Style and Colors” combo box.
An option that is hidden in this image is a checkbox that allows your application look and color to be changed at runtime. You can choose your application look and color at design time, but if the user wants to change it, he can do so easily. This is possible because the drawing of all the user interface elements is done via what is called a “visual manager”. The visual manager takes care of all the drawing of elements, so if a different look is desired, all that is required is to switch to a different visual manager, and redraw the window, and your application instantly has a completely new look. As you can see in the image below, a number of schemes are supported, including Office 2003, Visual Studio 2005, and several different Office 2007 schemes which use different colors. All of these are implemented using visual managers.
An option that is disabled in the image below (because ribbon was chosen instead of menu bar) is a checkbox that enabled “personalized menu behavior”. This means that the menus will not show all commands by default, just like in Office applications. When a menu is hovered over briefly, the menu will expand to contain its full set of commands. And as the application is used, the most-used commands are added to the menu by default, so over time, the menu will become personalized to how it is being used.
Below is a screenshot of a running application which uses a ribbon. This is actually the application created by the Application Wizard when the “Office” project style is chosen. There is an Outlook-style navigation bar docked on the left side of the frame, and a caption (or message) bar at the top of the client area. Note that the application button, quick access toolbar buttons, and the ribbon elements have keyboard hotkeys which are available when the Alt key is pressed. On the right hand side of the ribbon is a drop-down element named “Style”, and from it you can choose which color you’d like the application to be presented in.
Easy to update existing MFC code
One of the great things about the new components is that they’re easy to incorporate into existing applications. All of the new behavior is encapsulated in new classes, and none of the existing classes have been modified. If you want to update your existing MFC application to use the new menu bar and toolbar support, all that is required to update your application to the new look is to change the base classes of your application and frame windows, and add a few lines of code, and you’ve just updated your application to have a more modern interface.
Below is an image of the new DrawClient sample. This is a remodel of the DrawCli sample that ships with MFC—it’s been updated to include Ribbon support. Most of the modifications to the source code were in mainfrm.h and mainfrm.cpp. The ribbon is currently built entirely in code. The ribbon is created and then the various ribbon elements (application button, quick access toolbar, categories, etc.) are added via calls to ribbon member functions. However, the underlying command architecture did not have to change—all the ribbon controls can be associated with a command identifier, and when the command is fired, it is handled via the existing command handlers. The object drawing code did not have to change in any substantial way—it was only augmented to allow a few new capabilities. One of these capabilities is something I’ll call “command preview”. This means that, just like in the new Office applications, you can see the effect of a command before actually choosing it. For example, the purple rounded rectangle is active below. As you float the mouse over the large color buttons in the ribbon, the rectangle will temporarily change color to match the color of the button the mouse is hovered over. When you click on the button, the color of the rectangle will then be changed.
We’re pretty excited about all these new additions to MFC, and we hope you are too! Feel free to ask any questions you have about the new features and I’ll do my best to answer.
Visual C++ Libraries Development
Can we use these features for Native programs are written in Win32 APIs ?
or it is just for MFC ?
@Nima: It's obviously just for MFC Apps.
@MSFT: You should really make sure to purchase the best-quality GUI lib available for yourself and your customers. It's a major decision. Once you've shipped it, you will have to fix and tweak it for decades. Just getting it cheap and quickly is a bit shortsighted.
Thanks God, I still code using Win32 APIs alone!
@MSFT: Pushing new design concepts using a cheap immitation like BCG, is a bad desision, very bad...
"Luckily, your situation will be somewhat mitigated since you can still deploy the Orcas RTM bits which won't include this update."
I don't consider "RTM bits" for production use. You've lost your last creditability with VS2005.
I would like to raise my concers with this again:
a) Performance and quality. Both are abysmal and you know it.
b) File size. Don't want to repeat myself, there is no technical reason that justifies the bundling but many not to do it.
c) Compile time. Including the BCGControlBar in the precompiled header increases the compile time by about 50%.
d) Legal issues. Bundling the BCGControlBar with the MFC is anticompetitive. It's the same as the Media Player and Windows. Therefore I'm going to report this to the European Commissioner for Competition (http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/kroes/index_en.html), and hopefully they will act. Maybe a petition would be helpful. I'm looking forward to the N SKU of Visual Studio.
Visual C++ lacks so many features, refactoring, code metrics (!), C99, etc. It has become a absolutely pathetic product.
Nice to know our comments and feedback (people who actually USE MFC -- think about MSFT, you DON'T use it) have been *useless* and a *waste of time*. The general attitude from MSFT on this topic has been:
Us: "BCG is poor quality"
Msft: "We disagree"
Us: "Heres a list of problems..."
Msft: "We still disagree"
Us: "We are concerned about file size and code quality"
Msft: "We aren't, we got this code on the cheap. You'll have to live with it"
Us: "We are concerned about turn around with the bug fixes"
Msft: "Come on, you can't wait 2 to 3 years for the next release?? We haven't released timely fixes since Visual Studio Studio 4.x"
Us: "Fine, how about at least putting it in a seperate DLL so we can turn it off if we want?"
I suggest everyone send Mr Kroes a polite "me too" email about this issue (as I have done) whether you are in Europe or not. The only customer feedback MSFT seems to listen to is "anti-trust" and "class action lawsuit".
Obviously, there was no choice. In any case Microsoft had to take either BCG, or CodeJock. Unfortunately, CodeJock is not any better: non MFC-native design, product stability, high maintenance cost (a lot of +5, -7 in the code makes it slightly faster - but it's a pain to maintain)/overall code quality, lack of certain features - all of that puts it aside.
"We aren't, we got this code on the cheap. You'll have to live with it"
You certainly can't know the price, unless you work for MSFT or for BCGSoft. Yes, BCGSoft's code is easier to maintain, from this point of view it's cheap.
"We are concerned about file size and code quality"
Yes, some ifdefs would help. Regarding the code quality I said above.
"We are concerned about turn around with the bug fixes"
So again, taking the CJ's code quality into account it wouldn't be better.
Well, it seems the MFC community in general thinks CJ is a better library. I have not used either library in my applications (and have no intention to), but I have *closely* examined demos from BCGSoft, Codejock and a few others. If I had to pick one of the libs based off of demos alone, I'd take a few + 5 and - 7's over insane flicker and painting bugs any day of the week. In fact, I'll even tell you that my GUI library has a lot of performance tweaks like that (as I'm sure Windows itself does) as well and I maintain it just fine. Its an MFC native design and reuses Win32 controls wherever possible (including the real win32 menus). So I add + 5 or subtract - 7 in a few places or assume a radio buttons size. I don't assume things that will "commonly" change like fonts or string lengths, etc. Unlike BCG, I'd challenge you to find an iota of flicker in my GUI lib or performance issues. And *that* is my goal.
P.S. I don't mean to imply that my lib is only hardcoded for specific setups. It works just fine on NT4, NT5, XP, 2003 and Vista. It also works just fine with all themes, classic mode and high contrast mode and can change on the fly at runtime (something which was clearly not tested in VS or BCG). I also provide speedy fallback functions for earlier OSes (ie. 32bit alpha BMP support on NT4 and NT5). My point is, you can have performance optimizations and still work fine across the board and be maintainable.
So would you buy a tweaked sport car to take your children to school? :)
Not if its lights flickered.
a) Performance and quality. Both are abysmal and you know it
Sorry, but it's just your humble opinion. Many others think differently. You can find the proof in many famous products incorporating BCG's stuff, and you can read MHO about CJ's code above. So, who's right?
So, if XT was included, what would be the difference?
Just buy a faster computer. Haven't you bought one for the Vista yet?
d) Legal issues.
So just assume MS has developed its own technology for the ribbons and other stuff. Does it make the competiotr's life easier? Would you spam Mr Kroes in that case?
I was hoping for something more than integration of an already available library when reading about VS2008 support for the ribbon control. Something lightweight and to the point, not a bloated library that is only usable with MFC. I have switched to WTL a loooong time ago and it is superior to MFC in almost every aspect. Oh, well...no good news for me then.
A little rant: Why does Microsoft invest in such monsters as MFC and .net framework? If it were not Microsoft pushing these technologies, nobody will be using them.
You should try read the responses on here, newsgroups, etc. Its not mine or Andres opinion. Its that of most people. Yeah, so Nero uses it. Big whoop. Nero doesn't exactly have the best UI.
Buy a faster computer? Uh, you want to pay for it?
While I think CJ is the better product when compared to BCG, I wouldn't want CJ integrated either.
I clearly stated that while its good for some people to have the free library (of any kind or quality), it should not be forced on us because of whatever reason MS chose.
We simply stated we wanted it in a different DLL so we could turn it off.
Doesn't BCG require me to now ship GDI+ too? I recall reading they have an #ifdef to turn that off, but how is that going to work if its all integrated into MFC?
I have less use for the bloated GDI+ then I do for BCG.
"You should try read the responses on here, newsgroups, etc. Its not mine or Andres opinion. Its that of most people."
ACD Systems, Altova - "big whoop" too? The list of BCG's customers is big enough...
In addition, I won't be surprised if this "most of people" is just a few guys spaming across news groups and blogs under different names.
"We simply stated we wanted it in a different DLL so we could turn it off."
This simple statement is accompanied by words like "horrible" and so on. Do you think it's fair? You have to prove that first. Otherwise everything you say is senseless.