Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:37633 comp.os.msdos.programmer:4273
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!gatech!psuvax1!psuvm!bms101
From: BMS101@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: difference 'tween microsoft c and quick c ?
Message-ID: <91086.162126BMS101@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: 27 Mar 91 21:21:25 GMT
References: <2661@bnlux0.bnl.gov> <91080.224635BMS101@psuvm.psu.edu>
 <27E9CA04.7275@ics.uci.edu>
Organization: Alphabetical
Lines: 16
X-Subliminal-Message: IBM/370 assembler is your friend.

I don't program for Windows or OS/2. Other than that do you know any difference
 between Quick and MSC 6. I don't (the front end). I now, use Quick only to por
t the applications that I had written in it previously to Turbo C++. Please no
religious flames on this matter, if I had a reason to stick with MS I would but
right now I can't think of one. I like Quick and that is what I learned on but
I would like to painlessly slip into objects and working in an environment that
 supports them will work out better for me in the end. I cannot justify the add
ed expense of purchasing either Borland C++ or MSC 6 and the SDK since I neithe
r use or program for windows. Maybe when I get enough RAM and a Fast enough Mac
hine to use Windows to it's fullest capabilities then I'll worry about it or
(Buy a MAC) that is what windows is trying to be isn't it?
-----------------
              B  O  R  N    T  O    C  O  D  E !
Luck is directly    |BRADLEY SMALL        | Is it really "PROGRAMMING"
proportional to how |BMS101 AT PSUVM      | when it works right the
hard one works!     |BMS101@PSUVM.PSU.EDU | first time.