home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: fnnews.fnal.gov!usenet
- From: kriol@thor.fnal.gov (Oleg Krivosheev)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: Symantec C++ 7.1 or Borland C++ 4.53
- Date: 23 Mar 1996 18:45:41 -0600
- Organization: fnal
- Sender: kriol@thor.fnal.gov
- Message-ID: <vi8ybor48ui.fsf@thor.fnal.gov>
- References: <4c560k$e7d@dyson.brisnet.org.au>
- <4dht12$lt2@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <4i8od9$clt@Steinlager.tip.net>
- <s9460330.6.827581672@cosine.up.ac.za>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.fnal.gov
- In-reply-to: s9460330@cosine.up.ac.za's message of Sat, 23 Mar 1996 11:47:52
- GMT
- X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.1
-
- In article <s9460330.6.827581672@cosine.up.ac.za> s9460330@cosine.up.ac.za (G.A. Lombard) writes:
-
- Hi,
-
- >>Definately BC45. There are so many more books and so much more source code
-
- >Symantec C++ 7.21 and ask those Borland users why they are switching
- >to Symantec :-). Borlands comes with OWL classlibrary, and there are
-
- I've used Borland C++. I still like Borland C++ 3.1 for simple (DOS)
- applications. But I've switched to Symantec C++ for Windows
- development because:
- * I prefer MFC above OWL
- * Symantec C++ has an excellent Object Oriented IDDE. It parses source files
- at design time which allows you to browse the class hierarchy without needing
- to compile the project for example.
- * Symantec C++ is compatible with Visual C++ and Borland C++ at source level.
- (except BGI programs, obviously).
- * SC++ compiles faster
- * SC++ OPTLINK generates faster code
- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-
- man,
- tell me about OS (Windows/*IX/Mac...) where linker ( !!!LINKER!!! )
- generates _ANY_ code (fast or slow one) AT ALL !!!
-
- think before giving an advice... OK
-