home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: iafrica.com!not-for-mail
- From: vincer@iaccess.za (Vince Risi)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: Mastering C++ (Visual C++ V4.0 vs. Borland C++ V4.5)
- Date: 22 Feb 1996 07:25:47 +0200
- Organization: Internet Africa public service
- Message-ID: <ldJKxg2yqn2C083yn@iaccess.za>
- References: <4fq433$e75@redstone.interpath.net> <4g5kj6$rqv@btree.brooktree.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: minnie.iafrica.com
-
- In article <4g5kj6$rqv@btree.brooktree.com>,
- sasha@brooktree.com (Alex Bakaev) wrote:
- > softbase@mercury.interpath.net (Scott McMahan - Softbase Systems)
- > wrote:
- >
- > [deleted]
-
- > Incidentally, MSC 4.0 ( I do not recall earlier versions ) was Lattice
- > C compiler MS bought.
-
- From MSC 3.0 onwards it was MS. MSC 2.0 was the Lattice C compiler.
- Around about the time Wizzard C became Turbo C 1.0, MS brought out
- MSC 4.0.
-
- Vince
- =====
-
- VC++ 4.0 is something like MSC 10.0. Its biggest drawback is that it
- is only 32 bit, and we are still stuck here in the 16 bit world. I
- believe that BC++ 5.0 only will be 32 bit hosted, but will produce
- 16 bit code. The best solution to the 16/32 bit problem is perhaps
- BC++ 4.5 or Delphi (which will port 16 bit to 32 bit with a
- recompile.)
-
- VC++ 4.0 on the right hardware is a apparently a very nice
- development environment. This unfortunately seems to be the
- bleeding edge with large memory requirements, gigabyte disks
- and high performance pentiums PCs. I wonder what the footprint
- for BC++ 5.0 will be. (Delphi32 runs fine on a measly 486/33)
-
- Vince
- =====
-
-
-