home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.primenet.com!not-for-mail
- From: mdedev@primnet.com (mdedev@primenet.com)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.c,comp.object,comp.software-eng
- Subject: Re: Q: Is Microsoft's Visual C & SDK best for developing c progs f W 3.11
- Date: 27 Mar 1996 08:51:01 -0700
- Organization: Primenet Services for the Internet
- Sender: root@primenet.com
- Message-ID: <4jbo55$9pu@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>
- References: <1995Jul3.034108.4193@rcmcon.com> <3taaha$p8j@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> <3taodp$859@saba.info.ucla.edu> <3tap9h$qp3@saba.info.ucla.edu> <314628F2 <3157899E.6CD@profline.nl>
- X-Posted-By: ip005.lax.primenet.com
- X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+
-
- In article <3157899E.6CD@profline.nl>, Rik Assen <rikassen@profline.nl> says:
- >
- >I'm looking for some advice on selecting a C compiler for programs that can
- >communicate both with the RS232 interfaces and Humans by click-clacking fancy
- >windows, help files etc.
- >
- >Borland C++ 3.1 (which I used for dos for many years) is in my opinion not
- >suitable for Windows development because of MANY books (about 15 cm for
- >windows development alone) and not so much on-line / context sensitive help.
- >
- >Please send input/responses to:
- >
- >rikassen@profline.nl
- >
- >Thank you.
-
- I have used BC 4.5, and yes there's a lot of paper, but I don't
- understand why you think that is a *bad* thing. All that is on paper is
- available on-line, near as I can tell, and having paper has it advantages,
- like reading it in bed, or whilst standing in the kitchen next to the
- microwave, or in the doctor's office.
-
- For the record, though, if you are thinking of using NT or WIN95, I'd
- seriously consider Microsoft VC++ 4.x. I really thought Borland had
- won til I tried it. Now, mind you, I basically think all of Microsoft
- should be put through an OS/2 Warp-style shredder object, but I have
- found, that VC is pretty good -- just don't inhale.
-
- Bob Whitten
-