SFML 2.1 Visual Studio 2013 binaries + source + template

[Oli_Mo]

All I want to say to the thread starter: <3

I really love to use VS2013 and I like to be up to date on IDEs.
Thx, you made my day.

Of course a big thanks to Laurent, I'm a big fan of yours
and I'm pretty thankful for this nice project you created.

Greetz, Mo

[Skyler]

Could I get some help installing this? Firstly, I don't have this exact path Microsoft Visual Studio 12.0\VC\vcprojects, The part I don't have is vcprojects. I tried making my own folder called that and extracting the template file to there but it didn't work. There are other folders in Microsoft Visual Studio 12.0\VC\vcprojects called VC ProjectDefaults, VCProjectItems_WDExpress, vcprojects_WDExpress, vcprojectitems, would I put it in any of those? For now i tried putting it in vcprojects_WDExpress and SFML Game Does show up in the Visual C++ Template when creating a new project. I opened it up but I don't see the code that he showed in the quote. I've been learning to program in C++ for the past month but I haven't had to add new libraries or templates yet. To be honest even with this tutorial I have no idea what I'm doing. Could someone please help me get this running? I will attach a picture of my VC Directory.
Much appreciated.

[eXpl0it3r]

You should rather follow the tutorials and learn how to set things up on your own. Sooner than later you'll have to learn it anyways. Plus it's also a good idea to build directly from source with CMake, so you get to learn that as well. Building and linking libraries is one of the most important things in programming.

[georger]

Could I get some help installing this?

08/09/2014 UPDATE: The template's Post-Build Event was updated to copy the SFML DLLs to $(OutDir) rather than to $(SolutionDir)$(Configuration)\. The rationale is that if you changed the Output Directory from $(SolutionDir)$(Configuration)\ to some other folder, the Post-Build Event would still copy the DLLs to $(SolutionDir)$(Configuration)\ rather than to your custom output folder. Fixed.

In order to make things easier, I took a shot at doing a bundle (VS2013 binaries + template) that is simpler to install and use. Here are the steps:

BINARIES
1) Download the binaries from here.
2) Unzip anywhere you want. As a suggestion, you could use C:\SFML-2.1.
3) Create a system environment variable called SFML2_HOME pointing to the folder where you unzipped the file.

TEMPLATE
1) Download the template from here.
2) Copy the attached ZIP file to Documents\Visual Studio 2013\Templates\ProjectTemplates under your home folder.
3) Open Visual Studio and click FILE, New Project... The "SFML2 Application" Visual C++ template is now available. Create your project.
4) The project is all set up, and the small bundled sample program (the one from the tutorial) is ready to compile.

Details:
The binaries and the template were made with Visual Studio 2013 Express Edition Update 1 running on Windows 8.1 Pro x64. Since VS2013EE only ships with a x86 SDK, I couldn't try and make the template x64-compatible. I also didn't bother building static libraries.
Also, it doesn't matter if you have the SFML2 DLLs in your PATH environment variable nor in the output folder. The template includes a Post-Build Event that copies the DLLs from $SFML2_HOME\bin to the output folder in case they're not there already.

[Jesper Juhl]

OK, I'll probably come across as a grumpy old dude, but I'll take that risk.

While I in no way object to people trying to help out other people by providing easy to use tools/tutorials/guides etc. I really don't see the point of something like this.
What on earth is so difficult in just cloning the SFML git repository? Building the library and adding it to your project? I find SFML to actually be one of the easier libraries to deal with.
Sure, you need to know your way around the compiler, linker, static vs dynamic libraries etc; but seriously, if you don't then please learn that stuff first. If building, installing and using SFML from source is anything but a nobrainer it should be a sign that you need to learn some fundamentals.

[eXpl0it3r]

While I in no way object to people trying to help out other people by providing easy to use tools/tutorials/guides etc. I really don't see the point of something like this.
What on earth is so difficult in just cloning the SFML git repository? Building the library and adding it to your project? I find SFML to actually be one of the easier libraries to deal with.
Sure, you need to know your way around the compiler, linker, static vs dynamic libraries etc; but seriously, if you don't then please learn that stuff first. If building, installing and using SFML from source is anything but a nobrainer it should be a sign that you need to learn some fundamentals.

We hear you.

Then again I've heard there's a bug where CMake generates minorly malformed VS 2013 project files.
Overall it's still way better to simply learn and understand the tools rather that trying the monkey-Shakespear theory.

[georger]

OK, I'll probably come across as a grumpy old dude, but I'll take that risk.

Actually, I think you have a very good point.

While I in no way object to people trying to help out other people by providing easy to use tools/tutorials/guides etc. I really don't see the point of something like this.

My point is: I'm trying to give back.

What on earth is so difficult in just cloning the SFML git repository? Building the library and adding it to your project? I find SFML to actually be one of the easier libraries to deal with.

Depends on the audience. I think this kind of contribution has the following target audience:
1) Beginners who still don't fully command all the necessary tools , e.g. git and CMake;
2) People who just want to dip their toes in the water as quickly and easily and possible (think Linux live CDs);
3) People who just want to automate a little bit of the work, that is, setting up a project on Visual Studio 2013. The project template automates this. Even in the case you don't want/need to build the library yourself, the project template is helpful - many times in the past I wanted to test a little bit of functionality and was put off by the drudgery of setting up a project.

Sure, you need to know your way around the compiler, linker, static vs dynamic libraries etc; but seriously, if you don't then please learn that stuff first. If building, installing and using SFML from source is anything but a nobrainer it should be a sign that you need to learn some fundamentals.

Yup, that's fine from a technical standpoint. But from a, let's say, "marketing" standpoint, making your software as easy as possible to get up and running is a very good thing. Many times in the past I was put off using a library because it was non-trivial to get up and running. For example, a library that only comes in source form and requires me to install and configure Python and Boost.
Finally, remember that SFML itself makes binary downloads available. I'm just offering one more.

[zsbzsb]

Then again I've heard there's a bug where CMake generates minorly malformed VS 2013 project files.

It does produce slightly malformed project files, but then again its really simple to generate VS11 project files and let VS12 do a one way upgrade 

[georger]

Then again I've heard there's a bug where CMake generates minorly malformed VS 2013 project files.

It does produce slightly malformed project files, but then again its really simple to generate VS11 project files and let VS12 do a one way upgrade 

Now what's the point in *that*?

People have to know their tools, yes. But do VS2013 users also need to know that CMake writes malformed VS2013 project files, and then have CMake generate VS2011 projects just so that they can let VS2013 upgrade those? Why do people not only have to take the longer route, but also know all the relevant bugs, quirks and workarounds? Then just scrap CMake and all other build systems, release only the source files, and let people write their own makefiles.

I've done this a thousand times, and I learned from it. When I have an idea for a project I just want to start coding, that's why I automate things.

[Jesper Juhl]

Somehow I'm not surprised. If you have ever looked at the cmake source code you wouldn't be either.
It's a mess - a horrible, horrible mess.  It mostly works (somehow) but they *really* should not have started down the path of making their own scripting language (badly). They should have focused on making a build system and adopted python, lua, perl or -something-.
If you want something sane, try Scons - just saying.
To find that cmake generates broken build files fails to surprise.
Just my two cents.

[Nexus]

What is this VS 2013 script bug exactly about? Don't hesitate to create a new forum thread so we can try to fix it, instead of discussing which workaround is the best one

And I agree that we should rather focus on making the standard way of installing SFML (via Git clone and CMake) as intuitive and user-friendly as possible, instead of providing several alternatives, all of which have their own problems and are only supported by one developer, who may cease the maintenance at any time.

[imote]

Thank you guy.
Successfully tested with Visual Studio Express 2013 Update 1
You helped me so much !

[imote]

Oh !
There is a problem !

In the vanilla configuration, the Network module is not configured. So I configure it and add .lib network dependences.
So it work in Debug and Release mode, but it don't work in Debug Static and Release Static mode, VS2013 says : External librairie [..].
I don't found how to solve the problem. Any ideas ?

I'm french so excuse my syntax and language errors 

[zsbzsb]

Probably the network static libs aren't provided, solve it by building SFML yourself. 

[imote]

Ok, thank you