[...]
Not having used an Express version before, I'm unsure of the
differences. Is there something out there that offers a comparison of
the different versions so I can see if there's anything I will miss by
using the Express version?
I can't speak for the 2008 version, but having used both Express and
retail versions of 2005, I can say that I found very little in the
retail version that I simply couldn't live without.
That's not to say there's no value in the retail version; I was just
surprised at how functional the free version was.
Things I definitely missed when using the Express version:
* Thread debugging support. Express will break in any thread as
needed, but it offers no UI to switch from one thread to another while
the application is paused.
* Integration. The Express versions are all individual according
to language. This was most noticeable when trying to use C# and
managed C++ together, as I had no obvious way to put a C# project into
the same solution with a C++ project.
* non-Forms, native Win32 support. There's no real resource editor
in the Express version, which means that if you want to develop native
Win32 applications that use dialogs, string tables, etc. you have to
write your .rc file by hand.
There are other differences, but these are the ones that seemed most
significant to me.
That said, you already wrote that you "cannot afford to buy the Pro
version of VS2008", so it seems that this is a moot question. Assuming
you need to use the 2008 version of _something_, you'll be using
Express and you'll soon find out for yourself what's missing.
I should have been paying better attention, but have not: can one
somehow upgrade VS2005 to handle C# 3.0? I'm assuming that as with the
other .NET upgrades, no IDE upgrade is required to support it (other
than installing the latest SDK), but I can see how C# 3.0 would require
a new compiler (duh
). I'm wondering if the compiler might be
included in an SDK release, allowing someone with a retail version of
VS2005 to continue using it even with the new stuff.
If so, that might be the way to go in your case.
Pete