Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!wa4mei!nanovx!msa3b!kevin From: kevin@msa3b.UUCP (Kevin P. Kleinfelter) Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer Subject: Re: CASE:W 3.0 vs Actor 3.0 Message-ID: <1561@msa3b.UUCP> Date: 7 Mar 91 20:14:55 GMT References: <1991Mar6.204925.461@splvx1.csc.ti.com> Organization: Dun and Bradstreet Software, Inc., Atlanta, GA Lines: 36 apeterson@splvx1.csc.ti.com writes: >Just when I thought I knew what I wanted to do, another piece got thrown into >the puzzle. Too many pieces; too many puzzles; too little time... :-) >QUESTION: >HOW DOES CASE:W 3.0 COMPARE WITH ACTOR 3.0 FOR APPLICATIONS DEVELOPMENT? >I've noticed that Actor is available for a limited time at $99; is CASE:W >offering a similiar deal? If not, who would have the best price for CASE:W and >is it worth it (~ 9x the price of Actor)? It appears that CASE:W is more >comprehensive. Is this true? The FAQ file says that CASE:W (spelled W:CASE) >requires the SDK. Is this still true in light of the recent release from >Borland (C++ 2.0)? CASE:W is now in version 3.1. It generates C code, makefiles, resource files, etc. If you don't have the SDK, you'll need equivalent tools to turn these files into an executable. BC++ SHOULD have everything you need. One little problem is that CASE:W builds a makefile for use by MSC 5.1 or MSC 6.0. You'll have to modify the generated makefile. CASE:W does LESS than Actor (in some sense). Case:W generates a shell C program, which you flesh out. The interesting thing is that when you make changes to this shell, if you later re-generate the shell, Case:W DOES NOT TOUCH THE LINES YOU CHANGED. I prefer to think of it as a tool in the sense that Lex, YACC, and make are tools. I have sent Actor and Object/1 back to their manufacturers, because they just crashed, did not behave as documented, etc. Case:W does is a little lower-level, but it does not seem to have as many problems. -- Kevin Kleinfelter @ Dun and Bradstreet Software, Inc (404) 239-2347 {emory,gatech}!nanovx!msa3b!kevin Look closely at the return address. It is nanovx and NOT nanovAx.