Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!letni!rwsys!spudge!johnm
From: johnm@spudge.UUCP (John Munsch)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: MS Windows Classes
Message-ID: <28947@spudge.UUCP>
Date: 29 Apr 91 16:40:44 GMT
References: <1991Apr23.203123.23403@odetics.com> <1991Apr25.134339.28411@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
Reply-To: johnm@spudge.UUCP (John Munsch)
Organization: Friends of Guru Bob
Lines: 20

In article <1991Apr25.134339.28411@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> ebergman@isis.UUCP (Eric Bergman-Terrell) writes:
>In particular, the Windows routines are called the same way (in fact
>both use the same windows.h file (which has all the function prototypes).
>
>The chief advantage of BC++ 2.0 is speed.  I've used MS C 5.1 and it's 
>simply too slow.  Borland's compiler is much faster.

Another perspective on the same thing...

The chief advantage of BC++ 2.0 over MSC X.X is that it is a C++ compiler 
capable of generating Windows programs.  The chief advantage of BC++ over 
Zortech is its speed and overall package quality (more bang for the buck 
due to WRT and TDW, etc.).

I believe that if you aren't at least starting to use C++ to reduce the
complexity of your Windows application programming then you are missing out
on most of the power of this system.

John Munsch
"Gentlemen, STOP FIGHTING.  This is the War Room." - Dr. Strangelove