Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!rex!keating
From: keating@rex.cs.tulane.edu (John Keating)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: BC++, TC++???
Message-ID: <7328@rex.cs.tulane.edu>
Date: 6 May 91 07:53:13 GMT
References: <1991May6.050403.19335@athena.mit.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: C.S. Dept, Tulane Univ., New Orleans, LA
Lines: 23

dridge@athena.mit.edu (Matthew W Eldridge) writes:

> What is the difference between Borland C++, and Borland Turbo C++?
> I know there is a substantial price difference, what does that reflect?

Basically, the difference between Turbo C++ (TC++) and Borland C++ (BC++) is
that with TC++, you are limited to creating DOS binaries, where in BC++, you
can create MS Windows binaries in addition to the standard DOS binaries.

> I was told the Turbo version is much more "robust"...

Other than that, I know of no other differences.  I have no idea which may be
more robust.  Considering the greater level of complexity of BC++, I would
guess, though, that it isn't as robust as TC++.

John Keating
-- 
 +---------------------------------------+ +---------------------------+
 | Looking for genealogical histories of | | keating@rex.cs.tulane.edu |
 | Keating, Migan, Pope, Hobbs, Wyland.  | | John William Keating, III |
++---------------------------------------+----+  +-----------------------+
| "My heart is stone and still it trembles    |--| "If you were right,   |
|  The world I have known is lost in shadow." |  |  I'd agree with you!" | 
+---------------------------------------------+  +-----------------------+