home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.ecn.bgu.edu!usenet
- From: Ignatius <i-wong@wiu.edu>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: Borland or MS???
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 11:46:51 +0000
- Organization: Western Illinois University
- Message-ID: <315A7C2B.D6C@wiu.edu>
- References: <00001a81+0000aac7@msn.com> <4hjmig$q7u@news1.usa.pipeline.com> <4i6jg7$l26@hoder.gre.ac.uk> <3159E343.551C@nando.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: tty034.wiu.bgu.edu
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)
- CC: i-wong@wiu.edu
-
- Caius Martius wrote:
- >
- > GL493@gre.ac.uk wrote:
- > >
- > > >>If you want to use MFC's, the only way is Visual C++ (or Symantec C++!).
- > > >
- > > >This is about to change with BC++5.0.
- > > >
- > >
- > > All I can say is Hoorah!! - Yep I'm a Borland Fan!
- >
- > The Borland C++ Development Suite definitely supports MFC...
- >
- > -Caius
-
- I've tried to compile and run some some sample MFC programs and
- BC5 issued so many warnings about MFC. On running them, the CodeGuard
- consistently reported memory leaks on MFC modules. This leads me
- to wonder if I should continue to use MFC or simply switch altogether
- to OWL. Any suggestion?
-
- I've always enjoyed using Borland quality products, both BC and DP.
-
- # ig
-