Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!columbia!cunixf!kevin
From: kevin@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Kevin Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: TurboC 2.0 Prof vs uSoft C 5.1
Summary: Takeing the safe way out.
Message-ID: <1989Dec19.151531.25554@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 19 Dec 89 15:15:31 GMT
References: <5438.2583C869@urchin.fidonet.org>
Reply-To: kevin@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Kevin Harris)
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 24

In article <5438.2583C869@urchin.fidonet.org> Bob.Stout@p6.f506.n106.z1.fidonet.org (Bob Stout) writes:
>In an article of <9 Dec 89 04:34:39 GMT>, Scott_A_Dalrymple writes:
>
> >Pardon me for restarting a debate which has undoubtedly been fought
> >(probably to a draw) many times before.  Which is better, MicroSoft
> >C 5.1 and Codeview or TC 2.0 Professional and Turbo Debugger?
>
>Since you already realize this is a religious issue, let's stick to known  
>quantities... Even most Microsoft fans recognize that TD is the state of the  
>art in compiler vendor debuggers. Which, of course, only means that the next  
>release of CodeView will probably be better. But for right now, I suggest that  
>your emphasis on debugging combined with the excellence of TD plus your  
>already having been proselytized into the Borland IDE religion through the use  
>of TP would argue strongly for your purchasing TC.
>
>As for me, I prefer Zortech... 

	I hereby register my vote for both TC 2.0 w/debugger and
MS-c 5.1 (althought I really like Codeview.) |->


   |Kevin A. Harris                                              |
   |119th & Broadway; Rm. 212  -or-  kevin@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu|
   |New York, N.Y. 10027        ...!rutgers!columbia!cunixf!kevin|