borland vs. microsoft

[serdar]

Hi. Does anybody say that what is better borland c++ or visual c++?
Which compiler does have more help?

[Ioannis Vranos]

serdar wrote:

Hi. Does anybody say that what is better borland c++ or visual c++?
Which compiler does have more help?

As far as I know, Borland has dropped the support for C++ (that is it
does not intend to create a newer version of C++ Builder), and keeps Delphi.
However there are other C++ compiler manufacturers for Windows except
from MS, like Intel.


--
Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

[Surendra Singhi]

Ioannis Vranos wrote:

serdar wrote:

Hi. Does anybody say that what is better borland c++ or visual c++?
Which compiler does have more help?

As far as I know, Borland has dropped the support for C++ (that is it
does not intend to create a newer version of C++ Builder), and keeps
Delphi.
However there are other C++ compiler manufacturers for Windows except
from MS, like Intel.

I have programmed in Borland C++. Borland can no longer keep up with
Microsoft, they have changed their strategy to focus on JBuilder, their
killer application.
About 5-10 years back Borland was THE compiler, no longer Microsoft has
successfully killed another competetition.

I have heard Intel's compiler is good. You can try that. There are few
sort of open source c++ compiler for windows too ex- Dev C++

http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html

HTH
--
Surendra Singhi

www.public.asu.edu/~sksinghi

[E. Robert Tisdale]

serdar wrote:

Does anybody say that what is better Borland C++ or Visual C++?
Which compiler does have more help?

The GNU C++ compiler is way better.

[Ioannis Vranos]

Surendra Singhi wrote:

I have programmed in Borland C++. Borland can no longer keep up with
Microsoft, they have changed their strategy to focus on JBuilder, their
killer application.
About 5-10 years back Borland was THE compiler, no longer Microsoft has
successfully killed another competetition.

I am not sure about the "can not keep up" part. I think they pretty
could, after all they support C#. "Delphi 2005" is both Delphi and C#
Builder, and it is pretty good for C#.
You may download the Delphi 2005 Enterprise edition trial and check
yourself.
I have heard Intel's compiler is good. You can try that. There are few
sort of open source c++ compiler for windows too ex- Dev C++

http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html

Yes I know it. Of course there are numerous C++ compilers, but I had
..NET especially in mind. Of course after Longhorn, all Windows compilers
will support "WinFX" (.NET) so things will be better then.


--
Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

[Duane Hebert]

"Ioannis Vranos" <iv*@remove.thi s.grad.com> wrote in message news:1102080925 .957511@athnrd0 2...

serdar wrote:

Hi. Does anybody say that what is better borland c++ or visual c++?
Which compiler does have more help?

As far as I know, Borland has dropped the support for C++ (that is it
does not intend to create a newer version of C++ Builder), and keeps Delphi.

Borland is supposed to make an announcement on Dec 15 concerning their
future plans with C++. It's likely that they will continue the CBX line and bundle
BCB with Delphi in some way but that's only a guess.

[Ioannis Vranos]

Duane Hebert wrote:

Borland is supposed to make an announcement on Dec 15 concerning their
future plans with C++. It's likely that they will continue the CBX line and bundle
BCB with Delphi in some way but that's only a guess.

That would be great, provided that it would support .NET pretty well (as
Delphi .NET and C# Builder which are bundled together).


--
Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

[Ioannis Vranos]

Ioannis Vranos wrote:

That would be great, provided that it would support .NET pretty well (as
Delphi .NET and C# Builder which are bundled together).

Actually I just checked my dusty C++ Builder bookmarks that I have been
keeping and in summary I came to this:
http://cppbuilderdevjournal.com/free...ol8_num9.4.htm
Man it looks like those people have no clue about C++, .NET etc!
At first, no rational developer is going to use C++ Builder/C++ Builder
X (I did not know that they were different products!), that does not
support .NET, provided that in the Longhorn era (due to 2006) all code
will be managed (the Windows API will be WinFX, that is .NET).
Also MS supported .NET from within C++ from the very first edition of VS
..NET. So what is this all about that now MS *will* provide .NET support
for C++? Are they living to another planet?
Also I never understood why VCL was always written in Pascal, but this
is the least important issue of all.
All in all, I do not think they will have much success on the C++ field,
because it looks like they have no clue on what is going on!


--
Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

[Jeroen Wenting]

"E. Robert Tisdale" <E.************ **@jpl.nasa.gov > wrote in message
news:co******** **@nntp1.jpl.na sa.gov...

serdar wrote:

Does anybody say that what is better Borland C++ or Visual C++?
Which compiler does have more help?

The GNU C++ compiler is way better.

It isn't and you should know that.
Unless of course you're an open source vigilante whose sole measure of an
application is whether it's open source...

Performance of created executables is consistently poor when using GCC
compared to Borland or Microsoft compilers compiling the same code.

[Surendra Singhi]

Jeroen Wenting wrote:

"E. Robert Tisdale" <E.************ **@jpl.nasa.gov > wrote in message
news:co******** **@nntp1.jpl.na sa.gov...

serdar wrote:

Does anybody say that what is better Borland C++ or Visual C++?
Which compiler does have more help?

The GNU C++ compiler is way better.

It isn't and you should know that.
Unless of course you're an open source vigilante whose sole measure of an
application is whether it's open source...

Performance of created executables is consistently poor when using GCC
compared to Borland or Microsoft compilers compiling the same code.

Agreed. But Borland is no longer interested in C++.

Microsoft always hated C++, inspite of (VC++) and everything.
So, for the long run "gcc" is a better choice, as it is not dependent on
anyone company and as long as there are C++ users it will continue to
evolve.

Ultimately depends on what the OPs need are.
--
Surendra Singhi

www.public.asu.edu/~sksinghi