So, I use Linux, and I've been trying to find the time to get into game programming. I started out with Panda3d and had some pretty decent results and got a feel for many of the concepts in game programming. Not too long after that, I decided to step it up a notch and go to something more powerful and C or C++ based.
I'm probably just really dumb, but I could never really figure out how to use Crystalspace correctly. If somebody has any useful resources on how to use it, I would appreciate that. But in the meantime, I was messing around with Irrlicht and I like it, but I would like to know what more knowledgable people have to say about the subject. And maybe theres another awesome option out there I don't know about.
If you ask me, Irrlich is the best open source engine - it has clear architecture, good performance and requires lesser code to be written by programmer. I can not honestly compare Irrlicht with Crystal Space or Orge. I consider CS as mess of code, written by many different programmers in different manners - I am hard to imagine how to use it too (due to absolute lack of documentation). As for Ogre, it is not easier than D3D. I've examined different samples and fount plenty multyline fragments of code that are done with a single line in D3D. So, I simply can not see a reason, why to spent months learning OGRE's terrible API - if one has free time, I would advice to learn D3D itself.
I can say even more - Irrlicht is better, than many commercial engines, for example - Torque (absolute lack of documentation, forces to start project over existing one etc.), Truevision etc. Of course, Irrlicht lacks some great features, AAA grade engines must have, but it is quite sufficient for smaller projects.
If you have not BIG money to acquire Gamebryo and similar grades engine, I would advice to stick with Irrlicht - for first several projects at least.
I've spent some time working in the game industry. I'm also a Linux guy. I used Irrlicht to make a couple games, and used those as part of my resume, which helped get me get a job as a game programmer.
Irrlicht has a cleaner API, lower system requirements and works better across platforms than Ogre, in my opinion. I've had a blast making games with Irrlicht. It's also fairly lightweight (much lighter than Ogre), with a very open license for any use, commercial or otherwise.
Working with that engine did a lot to prepare me for working within the commercial game industry.
Ogre3D
http://www.ogre3d.org/
Is typically named together with crystalspace and irrlicht.
Ogre and Irrlicht both are said to have a cleaner design than crystalspace so I wouldn't worry to much about problems with the latter.
If you're looking for productive game development, then my best bet would be to use Unity 3D. I started off by using Irrlicht but quickly backed out because of non intuitive tools and a lot of stress on programming. Ogre seemed to be even more complex.
Unity on the other hand is rapidly gaining grounds with each release. The recent Unity 4 is packed with a ton of features. With very little game dev knowledge, I've managed to write my own flight sim engine in Unity Android. Even learned to write shaders easily.
Though advanced Unity licenses are paid, but they are well worth it. But you can always use Unity free edition to make commercial PC games. In all, game development is all about getting the hang of a game engine. Master any, and you will rule.
Related
I am working on a new language, targeted for web development, embeding into applications, distributed applications, high-reliability software (but this is for distant future).
Also, it's target to reduce development expenses in long term - more time to write safer code and less support later. And finally, it enforces many things that real teams have to enforce - like one crossplatform IDE, one codestyle, one web framework.
In short, the key syntax/language features are:
Open source, non-restrictive licensing. Surely crossplatform.
Tastes like C++ but simpler, Pythonic syntax with strict & static type checking. Easier to learn, no multiple inheritance and other things which nobody know anyway :-)
LLVM bytecode/compilation backend gives near-C speed.
Is has both garbage collection & explicit object destruction.
Real OS threads, native support of multicore computers. Multithreading is part of language, not a library.
Types have the same width on any platform. int(32), long(64) e.t.c
Built in post and preconditions, asserts, tiny unit tests. You write a method - you can write all these things in 1 place, so you have related things in one place. If you worry that your class sourcecode will be bloated with this - it's IDEs work to hide what you don't need now.
Java-like exception handling (i.e. you have to handle all exceptions)
I guess I'll leave web & cluster features for now...
What you think? Are there any existing similar languages which I missed?
To summarize: You language has no real selling points. It just does what a dozen other languages already did, with syntax and semantics just slightly off, depending on where the programmer comes from. This may be a good thing, as it makes the language easier to adapt, but you also have to convince people to trouble to switch. All this stuff has to be built and debugged and documented again, tools have to be programmed, people have to learn it and convince their pointy-haired bosses to use it, etc. "So it's language X with a few features from Y and nicer syntax? But it won't make my application's code 15% shorter and cleaner, it won't free me from boilerplate X, etc - and it won't work with my IDE." The last one is important. Tools matter. If there are no good tools for a language, few people will shy away, rightfully so.
And finally, it enforces many things that real teams have to enforce - like one crossplatform IDE, one codestyle, one web framework.
Sounds like a downside! How does the language "enforce one X"? How do you convince programmers this coding style is the one true style? Why shouldn't somebody go and replace the dog slow, hardly maintained, severly limited IDE you "enforce" with something better? How could one web framework possibly fit all applications? Programmers rarely like to be forced into X, and they are sometimes right.
Also, you language will have to talk to others. So you have ready-made standard solutions for multithreading and web development in mind? Maybe you should start with a FFI instead. Python can use extensions written in C or C++, use dynamic libraries through ctypes, and with Cython it's amazingly simple to wrap any given C library with a Python interface. Do you have any idea how many important libraries are written in C? Unless your language can use these, people can hardly get (real-world) stuff done with it. Just think of GUI. Most mayor GUI toolkits are C or C++. And Java has hundreds of libraries (the other JVM languages profit much from Java interop) for many many purposes.
Finally, on performance: LLVM can give you native code generation, which is a huge plus (performance-wise, but also because the result is standalone), but the LLVM optimizers are limited, too. Don't expect it to beat C. Especially not hand-tuned C compiled via icc on Intel CPUs ;)
"Are there any existing similar
languages which I missed?"
D? Compared to your features:
The compiler has a dual license - GPL and Artistic
See example code here.
LDC targets LLVM. Support for D version 2 is under development.
Built-in garbage collection or explicit memory management.
core.thread
Types
Unit tests / Pre and Post Contracts
try/catch/finally exception handling plus scope guarantees
Responding to a few of your points individually (I've omitted what I consider either unimportant or good):
targeted for web development
Most people use php. Not because it's the best language available, that's for sure.
embeding into applications
Lua.
distributed applications, high-reliability software (but this is for distant future).
Have you carefully studied Erlang, both its design and its reference implementation?
it enforces many things that real teams have to enforce - like one crossplatform IDE, one codestyle, one web framework.
If your language becomes successful, people will make other IDEs, other code styles, other web frameworks.
Multithreading is part of language, not a library.
Really good languages for multithreading forbid side effects inside threads. Yes, in practice that pretty much means Erlang only.
Types have the same width on any platform. int(32), long(64) e.t.c
Sigh... There's only one reasonable width for integers outside of machine-level languages like C: infinite.
Designing your own language will undoubtedly teach you someting. But designing a good language is like designing a good cryptosystem: lots of amateurs try, but it takes an expert to do it well.
I suggest you read some of Norman Ramsey's answers here on programming language design, starting with this thread.
Given your interest in distributed applications, knowing Erlang is a must. As for sequential programming, the minimum is one imperative language and one functional language (ideally both Lisp/Scheme and Haskell, but F# is a good start). I also recommend knowing at least one high-level language that doesn't have objects, just so you understand that not having objects can often make the programmer's life easier (because objects are complex).
As for what could drive other people to learn your language... Good tools/libraries/frameworks can't hurt (FORTRAN, php), and a big company setting the example can't hurt (Java, C#). Good design doesn't seem to be much of a factor (a ha-ha-only-serious joke has it that what makes a language successful is using {braces} to delimit blocks: C, C++, Java, C#, php)...
What you've given us is a list of features, with no coherent philosophy, or explanation as to how they will work together. None of the features are unique. At best, you're offering incremental improvements over what's already there. I'd expect there's already languages kicking around with what you've said, it's just that they're still fairly obscure, because they didn't make it.
Languages have inertia. People have to learn new languages, and sometimes new tools. They need incentive to do so, and 20% improvement in a few features doesn't cut it.
What you need, at a minimum, is a killer app and a form of elevator pitch. (The "elevator pitch" is what you tell the higher-ups about your project when you're in the elevator with them, in current US business parlance.) You need to have your language be obviously worth learning for some purpose, and you need to be able to tell people why it's worth learning before they think "just another language by somebody who wanted to write a language" and go away.
You need to form a language community. That community needs to have some localization at first: people who work in X big company, people who want to do Y, whatever. Decide on what that community is likely to be, and come up with one big reason to switch and some reasons to believe that your language can deliver what it promises.
No.
Every buzzword you have included in your feature list is an enormous amount of work to be spec'd, implemented, documented, and tested.
How many people will be actively developing the language? I guess the web is full of failed programming language projects. (Same is true for non-mainstream OSes)
Have a look at what .Net/Visual Studio or Java/Eclipse have accomplished. That's 1000s of years of specification, development, tests, documentation, feedback, bug fixes, service packs.
During my last job I heard about somebody who wrote his own programming framework, because it was "better". The resulting program code (both in the framework and in the applications) is certainly unmaintainable once the original programmer quits, or is "hit by a bus", as the saying goes.
As the list sounds like Java++ or Mono++, you'd probably be more successful in engaging in an existing project, even if it won't have your name tag on it.
Perhaps you missed one key term. Performance.
In any case, unless this new language has some really out-of-this-world features(ex: 100% increase in performance over other web development languages), I think it will be yet another fish in the pond.
Currently I'm responsible for maintaining a framework developed/owned by my company. It's a nightmare. Unless there is a mainstream community, working on this full time, it's really an elephant. I do not appreciate my company's decision to develop its own framework(because it's supposed to be "faster") day 'n night.
The language tastes good in my opinion, I don't want use java for a simple website but I would like to have types and things like that. ASP .NET is a problem because of licensing and I can't afford those licenses for a single website... Also features looks good
Remember a lot of operator overloading: I think is the biggest thing that PHP is actually missing. It allows classes to behave much more like basic types :)
When you have something to test I'll love to help you with it! Thanks
Well, if you have to reinvent the wheel, you can go for it :)
I am not going to give you any examples of languages or language features, but I will give you one advice instead:
Supporting framework is what is the most important thing. People will tend to love it or hate it, depending on how easy is to write good code that get job done. Therefore, please do usability test before releasing it. I mean ask several people how they will do certain task and create API accordingly. Then test beta API on other coders and listen carefully to their comments.
Regards and good luck :)
There's always space for another programming language. Apart from getting the design right, I think the biggest problem is coming across as just another wannabe language. So you may want to look at your marketing, you need a big sponsor who can integrate your language into their products, or you need to generate a buzz around it, easiest way is astroturfing. Good luck.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_programming_languages
NB the names G and G++ aren't taken. Oh and watch out for the patent trolls.
Edit
Oops G / G++ are taken... still there are plenty more letters left.
This sounds more like a "systems" language rather than a "web development language". The major languages in this category (other than C++/C) are D and Go.
My advice to you would be to not start from scratch but examine the possibility of creating tools or libraries for those languages, and seeing just how far you can push them.
Should I use a game engine or a graphics library? I was just thinking of making a simple game to start out with, but what about when you get to higher-end stuff and high poly models? Which would be faster?
Also, should I choose Xith3D or JMonkeyEngine?
Or if I were to go with a graphics library should I go with JOGL, LWJGL, or the new JOgre?
Java is fine for making games, if I wanted to switch to c++ I wouldn't be asking.
There is in fact 2 questions to ask yourself to find the answer :
Do you want to make the game in no time or learn about more technical side of game programming?
Does the game is a variant of a well known/established genre or is it structurally different?
If you answered:
1==game && 2==genre : Use a game engine. Choose one that have been used for the target genre. Just make the game with this tool as fast as you can.
1==game && 2==different : As the structure of your game will be different, it will be hard to make something that match your game structure with a full engine. Maybe using a framework (made of several separated libs) will be of better use. Anyway, it will not be really fast to make but at least with a framework you'll not have to build the lower layer code and check that all libs are compatible.
1==technical && 2==genre : Well in this case you could study an engine or make your own. If it's your first game or your first 3D app, I recommand using DirectX or OpenGL directly one time, then pass to an engine later, like Ogre. Anyway, try to right yourself what techniques you want to learn about.
1==technical && 2==different : Take time to choose several libraries for each side of your game, then work on getting things together to make it work in your specific case. It might be the most interesting case but it's also the most time consuming. Anyway, use libs. Use ogre for graphics, etc.
Now, there is still a question to ask yourself when choosing your lib/engine, whatever the previous choice : does your game need to be cross-platform?
Check that your tool/engine match your answer to this question.
By the way, if you want to get in the industry OR want to get technical, you'll have to talk to hardware (at least if you want to learn about graphic programming) so use C++ (or C) instead of java. It will go in your way.
I wouldn't recommend Java for game development, as it tends to be slow and games require performance. To make a simple game, a graphics library would be enough. For a complex game, although, a game engine would offer you more interesting stuff.
A simple set of graphics libraries with some cool utilities to make simple games would be openGL + GLUT. I've already used it for small games...
Ok, so you want to learn game programming. You have a lot of options, but I don't see much of a plan in your question or comments, nor am I quite sure what your exact goals are. The only sure thing I get is that you want to work with 3D graphics.
The thing is, you're asking about performance without actually running into performance issues. Your question feels premature.
For the sake of making a choice, start building with JMonkeyEngine. It seems to be a fairly advanced 3D engine in Java. Starting with an engine allows you to concentrate more on the design of the game instead of having to fine tune everything yourself.
Take the time to make the game complete, with all the finishing touches, such as menus, player options, whatever completes the game. Finished projects teach you a lot about game design, and look good in your portfolio.
Repeat this process with slightly higher-complexity projects, over and over again. Depending on how quickly you advance the complexity and how well the engine is built, you will eventually reach a project where the engine doesn't keep up with your expectations. From here, you can take advantage of the Open Source aspect of the engine and figure out exactly HOW the engine is handling your design.
From this point your learning path switches gears. Instead of learning about generic game programming (which, by this point, you should have a fair bit of expertise in), you start to dig deeper into hardware interaction and low-level optimization.
This all assumes that you are only just beginning to get into game design and game programming, but have a fair amount of experience in your chosen language.
Hey guys, I'm very excited about how experienced I am in programming.
The first, working program that I have written, was in 2004 with C. Since this I have tried many programming languages, now got stuck with php. Currently I'm working as a web-developer, and everyones pleased with the work I do. Except me :) Thats the reason why i want to know, how high my experience and my knowledge is.
Could you tell me, some tips, tricks, test, or anything, on what I can see how much I need to learn and practice to get a mastermind in programming? (at first place in php)
I'm also a programmer who doesn't like to stagnate, so perhaps I can offer a few tips:
1) What's your weakest area? Networking? Graphics? Regex? What is the one area that if someone asked you "I need a program that can do X" and that X scares you what is it. Now study as much as you can on that subject. Hack out a few prototypes and make it so that you understand it allot better. I used to hate Regex commands, now I use them whenever I can.
2) Study "different" languages. I'd recommend learning a "functional" language such as Erlang, Lisp, or perhaps certain aspects of Python. Get a book on "functional programming" and read it through, and then think how you can apply these concepts to your current work. Start using map() and filter() in python instead of for loops, etc.
3) If you're doing web programming, get yourself a massive set of data and start doing some number crunching. A while back I was playing EVE Online, so I fired up SQL Server Express and hacked out some market analysis routines in it. It was around 4 GB of data the server crunched through, but I learned allot about SQL Server in the mean time.
I recently was watching a lecture on Lisp and the Professor said: "Computer Science is not about computers and not about science. It's about knowledge, and how to manipulate that knowledge to obtain more knowledge" So true, so the more tools you have for manipulating and gaining knowledge, the better programmer you'll be.
Start a new programming project and take your time to make every single aspect of it as good as possible.
Use git or Mercurial for source control. Use submodules (or whatever the Mercurial equivalent is) to manage external frameworks. Set up post-commit hooks to run your unit tests and zip up your executable. Use new branches for everything and do octopus-merges to get them all back into a single branch.
Script everything you do. Deploying a new version of your app (including website updates!) should be as simple as running a single script.
Make your app 100% localized. Deploying in a new language should be as easy as sending a strings file out to a volunteer to get translated, then popping that translated file into your source code, no additional work needed.
Optimize, optimize, optimize. Spend the extra week to make your app load 100ms faster.
Refactor, refactor, refactor. Don't just go for orthogonality and abstraction, aim for pure code beauty. Using your classes should be like using Duplo blocks, they just snap into place with not an error in sight.
Unit test everything. 100% coverage. Don't let a single regression go unannounced. Automate the entire test suite so that you can't promote your code without all the tests passing.
Put your app in the cloud. If you're writing something for the desktop or a mobile device, give your users a way to sync their data to a website. Write that website. If your project is web-based, give your users a mobile or desktop front-end to access their accounts.
Accessibility. Handicapped users should be thrilled with the care you put into designing your app.
Keep in mind that if you do everything I listed here, you'll never ship, but you'll be a well-rounded a developer, an asset to most any team.
Can anyone give me an example of successful non-programmer, 5GL (not that I am sure what they are!), visual, 0 source code or similar tools that business users or analysts can use to create applications?
I don’t believe there are and I would like to be proven wrong.
At the company that I work at, we have developed in-house MVC that we use to develop web applications. It is basically a reduced state-machine written in XML (à la Spring WebFlow) for controller and a simple template based engine for presentation. Some of the benefits:
dynamic nature: no need to recompile to see the changes
reduced “semantic load”: basically, actions in controller know only “If”. Therefore, it is easy to train someone to develop apps.
The current trend in the company (or at least at management level) is to try to produce tools for the platform that require 0 source code, are visual etc. It has a good effect on clients (or at least at management level) since:
they can be convinced that this way they will need no programmers or at least will be able to hire end-of-the-lather programmers that cost much less than typical programmers.
It appears that there is a reduced risk involved, since the tool limits the implementer or user (just don’t use the word programmer!) in what he can do, so there is a less chance that he can introduce error
It appears to simplify the whole problem since there seems to be no programming involved (notoriously complex). Since applications load dynamically, there is less complexity then typically associated with J2EE lifecycle: compile, package, deploy etc.
I am personally skeptic that something like this can be achieved. Solution we have today has a number of problems:
Implementers write JavaScript code to enrich pages (could be solved by developing widgets). Albeit client-side, still a code that can become very complex and result in some difficult bugs.
There is already a visual tool, but implementers prefer editing XML since it is quicker and easier. For comparison, I guess not many use Eclipse Spring WebFlow plug-in to edit flow XML.
There is a very poor reuse in the solution (based on copy-paste of XML). This hampers productivity and some other aspects, like fostering business knowledge.
There have been numerous performance and other issues based on incorrect use of the tools. No matter how reduced the playfield, there is always space for error.
While the platform is probably more productive than Struts, I doubt it is more productive than today’s RAD web frameworks like RoR or Grails.
Verbosity
Historically, there have been numerous failures in this direction. The idea of programs written by non-programmers is old but AFAIK never successful. At certain level, anything but the power of source code becomes irreplaceable.
Today, there is a lot of talk about DSLs, but not as something that non-programmers should write, more like something they could read.
It seems to me that the direction company is taking in this respect is a dead-end. What do you think?
EDIT: It is worth noting (and that's where some of insipiration is coming from) that many big players are experimenting in that direction. See Microsoft Popfly, Google Sites, iRise, many Mashup solutions etc.
Yes, it's a dead end. The problem is simple: no matter how simple you make the expression of a solution, you still have to analyze and understand the problem to be solved. That's about 80-90% of how (most good) programmers spend their time, and it's the part that takes the real skill and thinking. Yes, once you've decided what to do, there's some skill involved in figuring out how to do that (in a programming language of your choice). In most cases, that's a small part of the problem, and the least open to things like schedule slippage, cost overrun or outright failure.
Most serious problems in software projects occur at a much earlier stage, in the part where you're simply trying to figure out what the system should do, what users must/should/may do which things, what problems the system will (and won't) attempt to solve, and so on. Those are the hard problems, and changing the environment to expressing the solution in some way other that source code will do precisely nothing to help any of those difficult problems.
For a more complete treatise on the subject, you might want to read No Silver Bullet - Essence and Accident in Software Engineering, by Frederick Brooks (Included in the 20th Anniversary Edition of The Mythical Man-Month). The entire paper is about essentially this question: how much of the effort involved in software engineering is essential, and how much is an accidental result of the tools, environments, programming languages, etc., that we use. His conclusion was that no technology was available that gave any reasonable hope of improving productivity by as much as one order of magnitude.
Not to question the decision to use 5GLs, etc, but programming is hard.
John Skeet - Programming is Hard
Coding Horror - Programming is Hard
5GLs have been considered a dead-end for a while now.
I'm thinking of the family of products that include Ms Access, Excel, Clarion for DOS, etc. Where you can make applications with 0 source code and no programmers. Not that they are capable of AI quality operations, but they can make very usable applications.
There will always be "real" languages to do the work, but we can drag and drop the workflow.
I'm using Apple's Automator which allows users to chain together "Actions" exposed by the various applications on their systems.
Actions have inputs and/or outputs, some have UI elements and basic logic can be applied to the chain.
The key difference between automator
and other visual environments is that
the actions use existing application
code and don't require any special
installation.
More Info > http://www.macosxautomation.com/automator/
I've used it to "automate" many batch processes and had really great results (surprises me every time). I've got it running builds and backups and whenever i need to process a mess of text files it comes through.
I would love to know whether iHook or Platypus (osx wrapper builders for shell scripts) could let me develop plugins in python ....
There is definitely room for more applications like this and for more support from OSX application developers but the idea is sound.
Until there's major support there aren't many "actions" available, but a quick check on my system just showed me an extra 30 that i didn't know i had.
PS. There was another app for OS-preX called "Filter Tops" which had a much more limited set of plugins.
How about Dabble DB?
Of course, just like MS Access and other non-programmer programming platforms, it has some necessary limitations in order that the user won't get him or herself stuck... as John pointed out programming is hard. But it does give the user a lot of power, and it seems that most applications that non-programmers want to build are database-type applications anyway.
I am from .net C# background and I want to learn DirectX. I have knowledge of C++ but I am fairly new to graphic world.
I am little confused about how to start learning directx, should I start learning direct directly or buy a basic graphic book like hern and baker and then jump to directx.
Which is the recommended book for learning basic graphic concepts, is it hern and baker? Is there any directx book which will cover graphic concepts as well?
I think that keeping a basic graphics book is allways good, because i can use it as reference anytime
Any suggestions from experts here?
You say that you have a C# background so I am going to assume you are more comfortable with C# then C++. Also, you say that you have knowledge of C++ so I will assume that you already have an understanding of memory management.
If you just want to learn and become more comfortable with the graphics pipeline you should check out SlimDX and XNA. They both allow you to use DirectX without having to dive into C/C++.
As for whether to learn the theory or API first I don't think you should do either one first. It makes sense to learn them asynchronously. Pick up a book on the theory but mess around with an API at the same time.
I highly recommend XNA. People commonly say that you should stick with C++ if you want to develop games but I strongly disagree. XNA will allow you to learn more high level game concepts in less time than if you use C++ and DirectX alone. You will be able to focus on learning why you are doing something rather than how to manage the memory. If in the future you decide that game development is a serious passion then by all means C++ is the way to go. You will find that XNA's graphics pipeline closely mirrors DirectX 9 and wont have much trouble moving to C++.
Also, DirectX 9 should be good enough for any beginner and it will give you a better understanding of how and why things have changed in 10 and 11. However, if you really want bleeding edge technologies you can try out SlimDX which is a C# wrapper for DirectX.
With all this said, XNA offers many easy to understand samples that you can start playing with on their educational catalog page. Also, check out ziggyware (great collection of xna tutorials).
Also, there are many blogs you can check out. A lot of them have excellent tutorials on them. Here are some off the top of my head:
Reimer Grootjans
Shawn Hargreaves
Richard Dodsworth
Renaud Bédard
Nick Gravelyn
Finally, here are 2 graphics books that I highly recommend (they are pretty complex and will last you a long time):
Fundamentals of Computer
Graphics
Real-Time Rendering
They are not directly related to DirectX, but rather they cover the theory every graphics developer should know. (from linear algebra to texture mapping to volumetrix rendering...)
Well I have to disagree with the C# option. If you don't have a deadline to finish the game, then I recommend using the language that teach you most. Working with 3d graphics is A LOT about management so if you are avoding it you are not actually learning but just using it, ie. you not only have to manage memory but the actual render calls you make and the device state changes, a lot of things that you will never know by avoding lower level, and which applies for other APIs too such as OpenGL or for other kind of devices. I think the best way of knowing how the api works is by using the api, instead of a bunch of helper libraries. You can use the helper libraries when you really need it instead (which you can find in their C++ version anyway).
In the DX SDK you can also find the Sample Browser with some sample applications with their documentation and you have the DirectX Utility Toolkit which contains a framework and libraries to make a DirectX app without having to worry much about the nasty device things such as enumeration and config. It also comes with a GUI system and a settings dialog for the device config. I doubt you can find those in C# and they are very good if you want to start with DX.
Some resources that helped me when I started were
the zophusX tutorials
and a book called "Introduction to 3D Game Programming with DirectX 9.0c", by Frank D. Luna (there is the DX10 version now)
and probably the book 3d Game Engine Programming by Stephan Zerbst also helped me to understand some things about how to work better with the apis. Though you may have to buy them in order to read them. They are helpful to start with both some theory and using the API at the same time.
I think if your target is to learn how to make a game then you can use any language/library you want you don't even need to know a programming language :) but if your target is learning DirectX and graphics APIs you should definitively start with the C++ api which is the "actual" DX.
If you have a bit of extra money, I was very impressed with the DirectX graphics courses from http://www.gameinstitute.com. The textbook they provide was very good as far as the other DirectX books I've seen are concerned. The first module DirectX Graphics I starts off with a bit of a math review and some 3D fundamentals before diving into setting up and using DirectX. By the end of the first module you will have built a textured terrain renderer and an indoor scene.
Overall the courses are not that expensive when you consider how much books on the subject cost. I would definitely recommend checking it out!