Are there any codebases written in C++ that run on windows without using the CGYwin thingy?

I have the simpleMud and BetterMud from Ron Pentons mud book, but I can not get them to compile in VS 2008.

I am just looking for something to tear apart and examine for fun.
Thank you.

You can try SMAUG for Windows but the code is pretty old.

Note that you can edit your code in Visual studio and then compile it in Cygwin (or AndLinux), if you use Visual Studio for its autocompletion etc.

WinROM is also available by Nick Gammon.
What I did is use the Visual Studio configuration to make my existing ROM project compile.
It works with MS Visual Studio C++ 2010 (express) which is free and well worth getting. It has a precompiler unlike 2008
which will give you precompiled syntax errors and warnings which really speeds things up if you are new to C / C++

Not sure if ROM is what you are looking for since you like C++. Any C project will work in Visual Studio, the only thing to consider is which dll(s) and other dependencies does your project need. With the link up there, you should at least be able to look at the configuration file and start chipping away at it.

Running a diku based mud on a windows platform is certainly an unholy union.

"Can I have Runter's helpful comments for 500?"

You can have 2 of em. Use linux. Don't use diku based mud.

Nice, not only have you added value to this thread, you have saved the OP hundreds of wasted hours!

I am not sure what the SMAUG for windows is, though being it is from Nick Gammon's
site, and Nick is the one that added the win32 support to SMAUG 1.02a, I would
assume it probably is that code. His code though was made stock in SMAUG 1.4 and
later versions including any derivatives that have not broken it. CircleMUDs also
tend to come with native win32 support (note that when I refer to win32 support,
I mean compiling with MSVC++ and running right from windows, not with something
like cygwin or the like). One codebase that will only compile and run under windows
is Rusty's SmaugWizard (it is also a C++ port). I do all my work with MSVC++, editing,
compiling and test running with any MUD I have helped with, so I have had to get
code meant for *nix to work cross platform (I still had to upload to a *nix server and
have the code compile and run there too) and compile and run win32. Though some
code takes more then others, there really is not that much difference. As a side note,
I have had uptimes with the code running under windows that have been as long or
longer then on the *nix servers the live MUDs have run on. In fact, I may have had
less problems on windows then linux as far as stability goes. Though I would not go
so far as to say windows is a better platform to run a live MUD (though I know of a
MUD running SmaugWizard that I have not noticed any difference then a similar MUD
running on linux), I think the idea of windows being so bad is mostly myth.

Sharmair, you are the first and only person I've ever heard say that linux is unstable. In the 20 years I've worked with it, there have only been two kinds of issues I've ever encountered that didn't involve hardware failure. One was a buggy network driver which caused a kernel panic, this was back in 1994. The other is crashes in the X-windows desktop, which has nothing to do with the underlying system, and in fact shouldn't cause any problems for a server process that's launched in the background.

I haven't used X11 since about 2002, because I find Windows works quite well as a desktop, and I simply use ssh or samba to access files on the linux server.

In newer versions of Windows, Microsoft has reserved the right to reboot your desktop system at will when doing upgrades, even if you specify to NOT install such upgrades automatically. As such, I don't find it trustworthy for use in running a public game server. Fine for testing, but I like to choose when public services go down, not have it chosen for me.

I believe the open source branch of DGD also works with Visual Studio, if you wanted a non-diku server to play with.

That is what you heard? Perhaps you should have your hearing checked then, as I never
said that at all. My main point was that in my experience I have had no more issues with
the test MUDs on my windows 98 SE computers then I have had on linux servers. That is
a simple quantitative fact. But I would hardly call the handful of issues in the years of
having MUDs on linux as unstable.

To be fair, when you said this, it did sound a lot like what Quix interpreted:



I mean, he's not out in outer space, interpreting this as meaning "Linux is maybe
at least as unstable as Windows." I've been using Linux since '94, and for most
of the time from then til now, I'd have found your statement immediately risible…
and I might not even have got to your next statement:



Which at least seems to acknowledge some element of reality. What I really want to
comment on, though, is this:



It is absolutely, flatly true that for most of the existence of Linux, it's been a stabler,
more reliable home platform for server tasks than Windows has been a reliable
home platform for server tasks. Are you going to argue that Win 3.1x and Win 9x
and Win Me were superior server systems? Really? Cooperative multitasking?

Let's turn our attention to the preemptive multitasking Win family. From NT 3.51
to XP, the home versions of these platforms tended to need a reboot for any number
of trivial modifications…and that's really the key to understanding the instability
image Windows has in the popular imagination (sorry, it's not a myth if the reputation
is earned). You see, Windows boxes are put to all sorts of gaming and multimedia use
that either forces your installation of potentially unstable software or does so silently.
Just run of the mill web browsing is liable to install crap on your Windows. Over time,
the typical home Windows box would get ever more encrusted with flaky software
that chipped away at its stability and gummed up its efficiency. That's not a myth.

Neither, of course, is it an indictment of Microsoft's competence at developing a
stable product. I'm pretty sure the sever-class offerings in its product line are
bedrock solid and more than adequate for running something so trivial as a mud.

And, indeed, with newer versions of Windows and newer classes of anti-malware
protection, it may be that home-grade Windows is now on par with Linux for
stability. But please spare me the myth crap. Windows may well earn a reputation
for stability and reliability with its new products, and I hope it does. But just like
it does Linux fanbois no favors to foam at the mouth about how everything Windows
sucks, neither does it do you any favors to pretend that Windows reliability woes
are a fiction.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

I think most agree that *nix and networking go together like Vulcans and Logic.
Windows has the stigma for being "buggy" because it is for the most part. What I
find upsetting is that most Linux guys will dog Microsoft all together as if they
haven't produced anything but crap. I am a big fan of Visual Studio. To me – like
with Linux and Windows – everything has it's pros and cons. Vim is great for quick
editing, but if I am working on a C app with 30,000+ lines of code, I would prefer
MSVS. I'm sure the Linux guys out there prefer Vim and gdb to debug, but I say you
can keep your stack-dumps and I'll keep my runtime debugging with VS.

I guess I'm not saying much, other than I think it's dumb to swear your allegiance to any
platform just because it's popular (or worse, unpopular). I say, take what you can get and do what works for
you personally. If all you know is Windows, then there's nothing wrong with finding
ways to make things work with it. The whole "Linux rules all" attitude among the "hacker"
generation is just too clich.

First!

You can real time debug in gdb.

Oh, and I'm not a linux guy. I'm just a guy has spent a lot of time programming (starting with visual studio as a student in college) and has came to the conclusion that I'd rather develop in linux. And if I'm going to run a game server I'd rather develop it for linux. That's not OS bigotry. I guess I have to prove my windows-creds around here any time I point out a truism about linux.

Oh, and it's nonsense that you can't use an IDE if you're developing in linux. You're basically saying you like IDEs so therefore you like windows. What about an IDE in linux?

And IDE like Visual Studio won't work over command line and SSH that I've ever seen.

Linux doesn't have to be command line. That'd be like equating a dos prompt to using windows.

I know Linux doesn't have to be command line. But I don't run a Linux based machine. I use *nix based online hosting to handle all of that because it's got a more stable connection then I do. So my only interface to Linux is through SSH and the command line. And I think a lot of people that are just getting into MUDs and Programming are probably going to have the same experience. There will be exceptions, of course.

Yes, of course you can. But if you noticed I was specifically talking about stack-dumps.

I have used several IDEs in Linux, and if we were talking about multi platform IDEs then
I would see your point about only liking Windows because I like IDEs.

Last time I checked MSVS only runs on 1 platform. And that would be Windows right?
And it is a proprietary IDE designed by Microsoft, the main theme of my last post.

I don't know why you are so intent to counter my input when your replies indicate that
you aren't carefully reading my posts first.

Sounds like a personal thing. I didn't realize we were talking about contrived examples. Putting all that aside, and the fact that there's plenty of linux IDEs like netbeans. (and that this whole argument is starting to sound like, "but windows is all I have.")–

Since we are talking about projecting our own problems onto this entire discussion, you're developing in windows and pushing it to your linux host? So you're using windows for the text editor and pushing it to linux? That's still developing for the linux platform even if you use an IDE in windows.

So you like windows because you like a specific IDE. Gotcha.

So you're responding because you like to troll. Gotcha.