Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!brunix!porter!demillo
From: demillo@porter.geo.brown.edu (Rob DeMillo)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: TP IDE and BC++ IDE
Message-ID: <73519@brunix.UUCP>
Date: 25 Apr 91 18:44:59 GMT
References: <6445@bwdls58.bnr.ca> <73404@brunix.UUCP> <1991Apr25.135815.19679@cec1.wustl.edu>
Sender: news@brunix.UUCP
Organization: Brown University - Planetary Geology Group
Lines: 50

In article <1991Apr25.135815.19679@cec1.wustl.edu> wilcox@wucs1.wustl.edu (Don Wilcox) writes:
>>I'm quickly coming to the conclusion that BC++ for Windows
>>is a crock. It a great C++ compiler, but as a windows application
>>builder, its pretty useless. Calling it a much more rounded
>>package...I dunno.
>>
>I disagree.  I have spent the last 6 months working on Windows software.  I
>started with MSC 6.00, and after growing old waiting for the compiler to
>process my code, I moved to the then new BC++.  I can only complain that I
>cannot do my work in enhanced mode.  Other than that, the productivity gains
>from BC++ have brought me back near schedule.  A crock, this indicates to me
>that you haven't really investigated the product.  Perhaps you secretly work
>at Microsoft :-)?
>>

Ick! What a terrible thing to say about me!

Anyway...I've been doing Windows programming almost since Windows 3.0
came out. I am no fan about MSC (I use 5.1)...but I did purchase
BC++ and look into using it...I was not pleased with the
results...the compiler was slower than what I found with MSC5.1,
and I actually *lost* more development time in having to 
switch back and forth between the Borland debugger symbols and
the MS debugger symbols...why do I do that? Because the Borland
debugger (athough was a *hell* of a lot easier for me to use
than CV for Windows) lead me through several wild goose chases,
while the CV for Windows dropped me off right at the errors
doorstep. (In almost every case, the errors were memory related...
Borland TD simply got lost...)

In addition...Borland provides you with almost no tools. I frequently
use the heapwalker and SPY in the SDK...also, I have gooten *very*
dependent on the online Windows reference guide. I hardly ever
crack open the reference books anymore. (Jeez...I could barely
find anything in the reference guides...they printed the friggin'
page numbers on the *inside* near the binding...you couldn't just 
flip to the right page.)

Anyway Don...yes, I have investigated C++ by Borland...I have
both BC++ and MSW+SDK...guess which one I like better?

Reread my posting...my complaint wouldn't have a leg to stand
on if borland didn't raise the price and call C++ 2.0 a complete
Windows development kit...it is not.


 - Rob DeMillo			     | Internet: demillo@juliet.ll.mit.edu
   Mass Inst of Tech/Lincoln Lab     | Also:     demillo@porter.geo.brown.edu
   Weather Sensing Project-Group 43  | Reality:  401-273-0804 (home)
"I say you *are* the Messiah, Lord! And I ought to know, I've followed a few!"