Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!rex!uflorida!unf7!hite386!steve
From: steve@hite386.UUCP (Steve Hite)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: ZTC++ 2.10
Message-ID: <36@hite386.UUCP>
Date: 26 May 90 07:07:14 GMT
References: <23185.265A6F1E@urchin.fidonet.org>
Organization: CS Grad Student @ Univ. of N. Florida
Lines: 23

Bob.Stout@p6.f506.n106.z1.fidonet.org (Bob Stout) writes:

>  Actually, sight-unseen, I assume TC++ has a slicker (though not necessarily 
>"better") user interface and that the C++ version of TD is probably a little 
>better than ZDB. You're right in that I expect a refinement of a two-year old 
>compiler to produce better code than version 1.0 of anything - especially 
>since, for the work I do (important disclaimer - your mileage may vary), ZTC 

Bob,
   Wasn't there something in either InfoWorld or ComputerWorld in the
past year that stated that Borland *bought* (maybe read licensed, dunno) 
some C++ technology from Oregon Software?  If this is so, then it is
possible that the code quality of TC++ could be >= that of ZTC 2.06 and 
maybe your 2.10 beta.  We'll know soon enough, I guess.

   As a side note, is it possible to send you e-mail from Usenet via that 
long and nasty looking fidonet address you have? :-)  I've enjoyed reading 
your messages on a local Opus board in town (Jacksonville, FL).   Perhaps
you could send me a test message and I'll try to send it back. 

-------------------------------------
Steve Hite
...gatech!uflorida!unf7!hite386!steve