home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20 / NN_1992_20.iso / spool / comp / sys / ibm / pc / misc / 12539 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-09-11  |  1.2 KB

  1. Path: sparky!uunet!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!vax5.cit.cornell.edu!n65j
  2. From: n65j@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
  3. Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
  4. Subject: Re: Borland C++ vs Turbo C++
  5. Message-ID: <1992Sep11.181848.14857@vax5.cit.cornell.edu>
  6. Date: 11 Sep 92 18:18:48 EDT
  7. References: <1992Sep8.170415.24800@bluemtn.COM> <1992Sep10.150327.12901@cbfsb.cb.att.com>
  8. Distribution: comp
  9. Organization: Cornell University
  10. Lines: 17
  11.  
  12. In article <1992Sep10.150327.12901@cbfsb.cb.att.com>,
  13. mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant) writes: 
  14. > From article <1992Sep8.170415.24800@bluemtn.COM>, by gregp@bluemtn.COM (Greg Philmon):
  15. >> ....
  16. >> BC includes more powerful, standalone tools for developing, such as the 
  17. >> excellent Turbo Debugger, profiler, etc.  BC is an optimizing (sp?) compiler,
  18. >> TC is not.
  19. > I'm confused.  Maybe that only applies to the current release.  I bought
  20. > a used copy of Turbo C++ 1.0 which includes debugger, profiles, and
  21. > assembler, and I think it has optimization in the compiler.  I know
  22. > it's "Turbo," not "Borland," because I have to change "bcc" to "tcc"
  23. > in makefiles.
  24. >                             Marty
  25. > marty@hoqaa.att.com        hoqaa!marty
  26. > Martin B. Brilliant        (Winnertech Corporation)    
  27.