home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Path: howland.reston.ans.net!torn!sq!news
- From: willer@carolian.com (Steve Willer)
- Subject: Re: Borland or MS???
- Message-ID: <316030f7.334716633@sqarc.sq.com>
- Sender: news@sq.com (News Administrator)
- Organization: Carolian Systems, Toronto ON
- X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/32.182
- References: <00001a81+0000aac7@msn.com> <4hjmig$q7u@news1.usa.pipeline.com> <4i6jg7$l26@hoder.gre.ac.uk> <3159E343.551C@nando.net> <4jejc0$1mk@viking.mpr.ca>
- Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 19:40:56 GMT
-
- laurinol@mprgate.mpr.ca (Kai Laurinolli) wrote:
-
- >Yeah, but it only supports MFC 3.2 and 4.0 so if you are want to develop
- >16-bit MFC apps forget it. Borland neglected to mention this to us.
-
- I've had MFC2.0 compiled and running fine in BC4.5x for a long time
- (to support some legacy MFC code). I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to fix
- up whatever's needed to make it compile in BC5. In fact, you can
- probably use the compiler flags that make it act more like BC45.
-
- Of course, I don't have BC5 yet, so I can't confirm this, but I'll
- betcha it's simple.
-