I have used VS for 5 years,include VS 6.0,VS 2005,VS2008.
There is MFC foundation in windows development. I used to it. CWnd CWebbrowser CToolbar
It's very convenient to use.

I see cSprite,cImage,cSound and so on in the AppGameKit folder. I like the style,but I don't know how to use it. So I wrap a class named CSprite by myself .

I want to ask the TGC official. Why AppGameKit sdk can't use class? C++ is a object-oriented language,so I think class is more convenient .

AGK tier 1 is a BASIC language, not an object orientated language like C++.

If you want classes, use AppGameKit tier 2 which is C++.

Halley has been talking about Tier 2 the entire time. The problem is that they want to build an application outside of the structure that is currently offered by Tier 2.

I think Xanthor totally understand my idea. Mobiius didn't watch my thread at all.

Halley,

They could have made it. BUT... They want to have Tier1 and Tier2 similar from the command side. As there is no classes in Tier1 they went the procedural way on the C++ side too. It's very simple like that. You have stated that you are a seasoned C++ coder. If I would be crazy enough to use C++, then I would create my own classes which wrap AppGameKit in a way I would like it to be. Or are you not able to do this?

And here is a tip about XCODE. Don't compare it to VS. XCODE and OBJC are totally different animals when you compare them to the windows world. And judging by the questions you ask here, I get the feeling that you should first learn more of the ropes of XCODE and maybe ask your questions on the Apple developer forums. Alot of problems you seem to have are not AppGameKit releated but more dealing with how to use XCODE.

I would say that I prefer agk the way it presents itself now, in a procedural way. It's very simple and straight forward even if you are just a beginner starting out in C++

I would have to agree that the current way is best way TGC , could have went. It gives newbies an easy way to understand what exactly is going on , and allows more advanced coders the freedom to make what ever they pretty much desire.

Steve Jobs said " oriented-program is the future of the world." I think current way is not suitable for c++.

Halley: try Cocos2D

Thank you.MikeHart.
I will try Cocos2D.

If he will use Cocos2D then that means he bought AppGameKit for nothing!

I can use the two SDK. lol.
I wrapped some class with AppGameKit sdk.I also can wrap others sdk.

bjadams, why do you like to use 'he'? I am not used to it.

@bjadams: He wants classes. Cocos2D has a lot of them. And as a developer you should use the tool that fits a particular job the best. Don't limit yourself to just one.

Thing is, what advantages does AppGameKit have, if you are using Cocos?!

???? What makes AppGameKit less valuable if one user uses different tools? They are two different tools, with different feature sets and different development approaches.

Halley wants classes. As he/she doesn't want to wrap AppGameKit commands into her/his own classes, I was suggested using one of the ObjC/C++ toolsets there are out there that are more OOP based.

the whole point of this is to make games faster and easier, with that comes limitations, just the nature of the beast, having said that, its purpose is well done, one code base multiple platforms, easy to use code to make games fast, btu still look pretty decent/good. cocos2d has a bunch of limitations itself, but there you can inherit the classes and add functionality. though you can make a game faster with this then with cocos2d.

both are useful for there purposes. this is faster to make games, the real bottle neck ive seen so far is time to make graphics, or places to find top notch graphics people for rent/contract hire.

The main reason you find our C++ examples in the style of agk:rint("hello") rather than CDisplay display : display.Print ( CString("hello") ) is that we wanted a direct mapping between Tier 1 (BASIC) and Tier 2 (C++) so you could learn one and instantly code in the other if you chose to do so. As stated earlier, if we used a class structure, it would not migrate easily back to BASIC. One of our goals with AppGameKit is to make it easy for the beginner, and in doing so make it faster for more experienced users to code quickly. As mentioned, it really is down to how you prefer code. I have spent half my life using BASIC in one form or another, so it comes naturally for me to code quickly in that style. Some users come from a heavy object oriented background, and classes provide an equally powerful way to get code running quickly. If you 'really really really' wanted to use classes though, there are some hidden depths to Tier 2 AppGameKit where you can use internal classes that sit just below the agk:: calls. We discourage their use as they make migrating code back and forth more difficult, but if you are dead set on using object orientation, all the classes are there for you to discover. For an insight into this hidden undocumented world of AppGameKit classes, check out the wrapper.h file, and the following classes:

friend class cSprite;
friend class cImage;
friend class Physics;
friend class cNetCon;
friend class AGKSocket;
friend class AGKPacket;
friend class cFile;
friend class cMusicMgr;
friend class cSpriteMgr;
friend class cParticleEmitter;
friend class cSoundMgr;
friend class cVirtualButton;
friend class cVirtualJoystick;

Again, for those not entirely familiar with classes or who want a rapid response language, stick to the documentation as it will reward you ten fold as we migrate our engine to stranger territories of Java/Script, C# and other wonderful languages

Thank you very much.I have wrapped my own classed with AppGameKit SDK.