Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!stanford.edu!csli!murray
From: murray@csli.Stanford.EDU (Peter Murray)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Actor vs Borland C++
Summary: Should we switch??
Keywords: Actor Borland C++
Message-ID: <18055@csli.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 6 Mar 91 18:35:46 GMT
Expires: 9 Mar 91 08:00:00 GMT
Organization: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford U.
Lines: 32

Hi everyone!

I am working on an education application in Windows 3.0.  Currently we are
using Actor to write the GUI to a large body of code written in ANSI 
standard C.  To do this (you probably know) we must build a giant DLL from
which Actor can import functions.  We are having endless difficulties
getting the DLL to work correctly with Actor.

In general, the Actor solution seems like a bit of a kludge.  We must ship
with every executable the Actor kernel, our .IMA, and the DLL.  Yuck.

If we switch now to C++ we would have to do a significant amount of re-coding.
However, we would have only one file for distribution, and no DLL to muck 
with.  

QUESTIONS:

1) How is BC++ working?  Does it complile ANSI C transparently?

2) How are the C++ Libaries (Glockenspiel etc)?  What sort of support do they
have for complex graphics and text?

3) Should we switch (somewhat mid-stream) to C++ (reasons like future updates,
stability, one executable, etc)?

Replies by e-mail would be GREATLY appreciated!

Thanks a lot for any info!

-Pete

murray@csli.stanford.edu