Does anyone have any opinions about borland c++ builder 5, and microsoft visual c++ 6, as to which is better? Just in general i mean.
Printable View
Does anyone have any opinions about borland c++ builder 5, and microsoft visual c++ 6, as to which is better? Just in general i mean.
personally I like ms a little better. Some things are little such as the color coding instead of using bold and italics. And I like F5 compiling the program while in borland you have to push the compile button.
just my $0.02
if you are concerned about exe size -- Get VC++, it makes exe's at least 150 kb smaller for a simple hello world program.
VC++ tends to require a lot less to be distributed with your application as well.
wow, ms has gotten more praise here then it did on the whole forums in years.
Ms is my choice of app coz i cannot get ***** borland going :)
Ive never used Borland C++ Builder, but ive used alomost any other borland product and VC++ is better. The only problem i have with VC++ is that it cant make DOS programs. But Turbo C++ can, so i use both. If VC++ could make DOS programs, i might never even touch Borland products.
i just think that is kind of stupid. you would think that since microsft does make ms-dos, that they would at least have some simple capability to make dos programs.
what are you talking about?
Turbo C++ does not make DOS programs... unless, if you are refering to version 3, which I have only used once.
and I am pretty sure BCB can compile DOS programs, because I think it runs on *Nix boxes too... and if it compiles *nix, then it should compile DOS....
DOS is 16 bit though innit?
think so..... not too sure tho.... I've used DOS Console, and only the actual DOS O/S to format my computer..
Console Apps are not DOS :)
They're 32-bit command prompt programs, running in a multithreaded environment.
Real DOS programs are only 16-bit: As in, int=2 bytes not 4.
That's why Watcom C++ came with DOS/4GW.
I know DOS != console
but it's less confusing to say DOS console.....
:rolleyes:
is the programs you make with mvc++ going to run on win 2000? some where i heard there may be a problem..
Well... I just got borland C++ builder 5.0 professional....
it's a nice compiler, but, I can't find the option to compile with the runtimes, and I cannot find the option to make an application with only API + C++(no VCL)..... :confused:
Dennis
Click on File|New then Click on "Console Wizard" and select Win32 GUI and EXE.
It might be different though(I am using v4), but I doubt it.
thanks,
it was a little different but not much.
new -> console wizard -> select C++(instead of C), uncheck "console application", unchceck "use VCL" and check or uncheck whether you want it to be multithreaded or not.
Thanks :D
Microsoft is better
For me VC++ 6.0 is definetly better. The exe's are smaller, faster. The borland IDE is full with bugs. Borland's 'code insight' is slow and buggy. The entire Builder is slow. On my Celeron 400,128MB RAM,Win98 it needs 30 seconds to start (very very slow) and From what i heard almost all proffesional software development companies use VC++.
Actually, in Borland C++ Builder 5.0, the executables are an average of 15 kilobytes smaller than those of the release mode in Visual C++ 6.0.
And I haven't really tested the speed difference of Borland C++ Builder 5.0 and Visual C++ 6.0.
And Borland C++ Builder does take too long to load :(
and the IDE looks horrible, it's all SDI, so it has no "background". Plus it took me forever to find out how to make a normal Win32 App, the option is under "console wizard"
If I had to make a choice, and only use one compiler, I would probably use Visual C++, especially for DLL's, C++ Builder screws with the names of the functions..
But I'm happy with both :D
It was really interesting reading about others opinion but at last i didn't get it if there is any way to make dos programs. I mean win16 not win32.
Visual C++ cannot create 16-bit programs.
Trust me...you don't want to try programming in 16-bit...it gets messy :(
Well...if you don't mind staying within 64K it's just as simple, but past that you need to mess around with segments and offsets, near/far pointers and all sorts of other junk.
What do you need it for?
I realy hate borland fdi style
Nothing really I was just wondering if i can write programs for reall dos. By reall dos I mean for example when you turn on your system and you get to a dos command line.Quote:
Originally posted by parksie
Visual C++ cannot create 16-bit programs.
Trust me...you don't want to try programming in 16-bit...it gets messy :(
Well...if you don't mind staying within 64K it's just as simple, but past that you need to mess around with segments and offsets, near/far pointers and all sorts of other junk.
What do you need it for?
But if it is not possible I don't think I am going to botter research on it.
Thank anyway.
You can but you'll need a 16-bit compiler such as early versions of Borland which I think can be found for free.
Anyone know?
simple B-O-R-L-A-N-D S-U-X
i don't know, i have both, and i have learned a lot since i originally made this post. I think that borland is very powerful, but the interface and layout is just more confusing.
If you are building Windows application, use the VC++ instead of C++ Builder which is also a Windows RAD tool. Afterall, Microsoft has the "Home Field Advantage". Otherwise, Borland Turbo C++ is still the best.
Hope this helps.
substring.
well what exactly is the difference between turbo c++ and c++ builder?
I dunno, I haven't used Borland C++ but I have used JBuilder and I don't really like it that much, the layout and interface is just confusing.
yeah, they use a lot of non standard keyboard shortcuts, whcih doesn't help anyone...
Turbo C++ is a non-ansi C++ compiler. It's great for learning, because it's very easy to use, and there are no console windows, just the borland EZWin.
It can also make UIs, but you have to use the older functions(for win3.1, like CreateWindow, RegisterClass, etc. Rather than CreateWindowEx, RegisterClassEx, etc).
IMO the worst part about Turbo C++, is that it doesn't come with the STL String library, infact it doesn't come with any STL libraries. You need to write, or get a 'third party' string library.
Here are a few header files that contain STL functionality:
http://www.lvp.com/data/cpluspczip.zip
Forget about VC++, move on to C#, hahaha.
substring.
Forget C#, move onto assembly!
Forget Assembly, real programmers use Binary.
i prefer punchcards for the ultimate in convience!
Viva la switchs and LEDs.
I prefer a needle and a van-der-graaf generator :p