home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20 / NN_1992_20.iso / spool / comp / sys / ibm / pc / misc / 12447 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Text File  |  1992-09-10  |  1.1 KB  |  27 lines
  1. Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
  2. Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnewsc!cbfsb!cbnewsb.cb.att.com!mbb
  3. From: mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant)
  4. Subject: Re: Borland C++ vs Turbo C++
  5. Message-ID: <1992Sep10.150327.12901@cbfsb.cb.att.com>
  6. Sender: news@cbfsb.cb.att.com
  7. Organization: AT&T
  8. References: <1992Sep8.170415.24800@bluemtn.COM>
  9. Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:03:27 GMT
  10. Lines: 15
  11.  
  12. From article <1992Sep8.170415.24800@bluemtn.COM>, by gregp@bluemtn.COM (Greg Philmon):
  13. > ....
  14. > BC includes more powerful, standalone tools for developing, such as the 
  15. > excellent Turbo Debugger, profiler, etc.  BC is an optimizing (sp?) compiler,
  16. > TC is not.
  17.  
  18. I'm confused.  Maybe that only applies to the current release.  I bought
  19. a used copy of Turbo C++ 1.0 which includes debugger, profiles, and
  20. assembler, and I think it has optimization in the compiler.  I know
  21. it's "Turbo," not "Borland," because I have to change "bcc" to "tcc"
  22. in makefiles.
  23.  
  24.                             Marty
  25. marty@hoqaa.att.com        hoqaa!marty
  26. Martin B. Brilliant        (Winnertech Corporation)    
  27.