Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!purdue!haven!decuac!grebyn!ted From: ted@grebyn.com (Ted Holden) Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms Subject: Re: Borland C++ with Windows 3.0? Message-ID: <20226@grebyn.com> Date: 11 Jul 90 03:46:03 GMT References: <604@cvbnetPrime.COM> Reply-To: ted@grebyn.UUCP (Ted Holden) Organization: Grebyn Timesharing, Vienna, VA, USA Lines: 31 In article dsampson@x102a.harris-atd.com (sampson david 58163) writes: >In article <604@cvbnetPrime.COM> jshekhel@feds19.prime.com (Jerry >Shekhel ) writes: > >>Does anyone know whether Borland C++ is capable of producing Windows >>3.0 applications if used with the SDK? Also, can the Borland >>debugger, which supports hardware traps on the 386 be used to debug >>Windows programs? > >The current version of Turbo C++ does not allow you to use the SDK to >write windows 3.0 programs. Somebody please tell me I wrong :). I With all due respect to Borland, and they're due a lot of respect, they're 3 years late and many dollars short on this one. Walter Bright, one of the very brightest lights in American computer science, took almost a whole year getting Zortech's first version of C++ out the door and another year getting all kinks out prior to the new Zortech 2.x releases which, incidentally, support Windows development. The best info available is that the front end of a C++ compiler is something like five times as complex as that for a C compiler, i.e. C++ is about as complex a language as anybody can do any kind of a reasonable job with in implementing (Ada, by contrast, is TOO complex to implement well). You have to figure that Zortech has a 2.5 - 4 year jump on both Borland and MicroSoft in C++ and that they might just maintain it. I wouldn't spend money on anybody elses C++ compiler for DOS/Windows/386-IX right now. Ted Holden HTE