Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!evax!utacfd!merch!rwsys!spudge!johnm
From: johnm@spudge.UUCP (John Munsch)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: BC++ vs C6/SDK
Message-ID: <28737@spudge.UUCP>
Date: 5 Apr 91 17:13:40 GMT
References: <1991Apr4.091431.26337@qut.edu.au>
Reply-To: johnm@spudge.UUCP (John Munsch)
Organization: Friends of Guru Bob
Lines: 23

In article <1991Apr4.091431.26337@qut.edu.au> drift@qut.edu.au (Glenn Wallace) writes:
>We have about 10-15 people working on development of one package using
>C6 and SDK. I haven't seen BC++ in the flesh yet, but I doubt it is going
>to be robust enough to _seriously_ use.

Most of the negative comments I've seen directed at it indicate a large
number of people who are very new at programming Windows.  A lot of the
problems that people are having are the exact same ones they would have
under MSC & the SDK but they are reporting them as Borland problems.

>Is there anyone using BC++ for "finished product" type development, or
>only tinkering?

We are most certainly using Borland for all our current work and I expect it
to become our "official" compiler very soon.

>Glenn          "I shall remember to EXPORT EXPORT EXPORT my DlgProcs"
		^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
			You wouldn't have to if you used Smart Callbacks
			under BC++.

John Munsch
"I do not tinker :-)"