Language

[torrent]

I'll take my words of Visual Studio proof back. Actually, the proof i showed you doesn't really proof anything. (sorry!)

For those who wondered were and how did i get this:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>

<assembly xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1" manifestVersion="1.0">

<assemblyIdentity

version="1.0.0.0"

processorArchitecture="X86"

name="client"

type="win32"

/>

<description>uTorrent</description>

<dependency><dependentAssembly>

<assemblyIdentity

type="win32"

name="Microsoft.Windows.Common-Controls"

version="6.0.0.0"

processorArchitecture="X86"

publicKeyToken="6595b64144ccf1df"

language="*"

/>

</dependentAssembly>

</dependency>

</assembly>

It is actually to open utorrent with notepad as a document. I did not disassemble the application and what it is just a XML report made by modern IDEs like Borland C++ Builder and Visual C++.

There is somehting that might confuse people. the assembly thing showed in the XML report is not the same as assembly language. When people create a XML document, they are assembling a extensive markup. Assembly language will never look like that but rather soo confusing that is almost imposible to understand.

[Ultima]

Heh thanks for confusing us ;P

That's just a manifest, nothing to do with the IDE used. You can create a manifest file for just about any Win32 application, just that not all of them will look pretty or XP-styled.

[torrent]

Was Visual Studio IDE used to program uTorrent?

I'm pretty sure uTorrent is written in Visual C++ 6.0, using the IDE that comes with it (unless he writes everything in notepad and then imports it in the workspace, which doesn't make sense).

Well, not really. IDE only helps you with the code for faster development. If you are a profesional, sometimes you would rather like to work without IDE applications because you want to compile the source code with a different C++ compiler.

It is kinda a headache sometimes to program with C++ because there are tons of c++ compilers and IDE and you don't know which one to chose.

You want a good compiler that gives you good compartibility to different CPU machines, platforms of OS and give you a nice well compiled binary code that does not contains errors. Also that gives you a clean binary code so that it won't occupy a lot of space (in this case for utorrent).

Also there is the IDE, where it helps you to build big projects and applications faster. There are tons of them too and also, most of the times a IDE works with a specific compiler when you want to use another one. It is just a headache.

Anyway, it is very likely that uTorrent was programmed with IDE because of the XML report. (i hope i am not wrong this time - an educational guess you can say). What IDE or compiler was used, i would really like to know. However, i am still guessing that it used Visual Studio's Visual C++ - because it's compiler gives the smallest binary application compared to the one i've used so far.

[Ultima]

Read above response from me ;P

And yes, ludde used Visual C++ 6, as has been stated several times in the thread already O.O

[chaosblade]

Working in the IDE and compiling it are not the same things. You can still code and work with VS6\2003\2005 and take advantage of the editor features and such, And in the end run a command line compiler to get the final result.

[splintax]

There is somehting that might confuse people. the assembly thing showed in the XML report is not the same as assembly language. When people create a XML document, they are assembling a extensive markup. Assembly language will never look like that but rather soo confusing that is almost imposible to understand.

I know a bit of x86 assembler, so I know the difference. That's why i said partially decompile. Also, you don't have to decompile machine code into ASM, it's also possible to decompile into a higher-level language, although of course that's not all that reliable.

[torrent]

There is somehting that might confuse people. the assembly thing showed in the XML report is not the same as assembly language. When people create a XML document' date=' they are assembling a extensive markup. Assembly language will never look like that but rather soo confusing that is almost imposible to understand.[/quote']

I know a bit of x86 assembler, so I know the difference. That's why i said partially decompile. Also, you don't have to decompile machine code into ASM, it's also possible to decompile into a higher-level language, although of course that's not all that reliable.

True that we can decompile a code by using C++ decompilers but didn't. I don't have any decompilers with me....