drift@qut.edu.au (Glenn Wallace) (04/04/91)
Borland Pacific (read Australia) tell me my BC++ will be delayed... shipping problems they say. Maybe the IDE will run in Enchanted mode by then :-) We have about 10-15 people working on development of one package using C6 and SDK. I haven't seen BC++ in the flesh yet, but I doubt it is going to be robust enough to _seriously_ use. All the comments I see on here seem to indicate a reasonable degree of "flakiness" and "released-too-early-ness" with BC++. Is there anyone using BC++ for "finished product" type development, or only tinkering? For DOS (ugh) work, I still prefer TC++ for tinkering/development and then C6.0a for release. Glenn "I shall remember to EXPORT EXPORT EXPORT my DlgProcs" ===== sig ommitted to save wear and tear on modems.
johnm@spudge.UUCP (John Munsch) (04/06/91)
In article <1991Apr4.091431.26337@qut.edu.au> drift@qut.edu.au (Glenn Wallace) writes: >We have about 10-15 people working on development of one package using >C6 and SDK. I haven't seen BC++ in the flesh yet, but I doubt it is going >to be robust enough to _seriously_ use. Most of the negative comments I've seen directed at it indicate a large number of people who are very new at programming Windows. A lot of the problems that people are having are the exact same ones they would have under MSC & the SDK but they are reporting them as Borland problems. >Is there anyone using BC++ for "finished product" type development, or >only tinkering? We are most certainly using Borland for all our current work and I expect it to become our "official" compiler very soon. >Glenn "I shall remember to EXPORT EXPORT EXPORT my DlgProcs" ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You wouldn't have to if you used Smart Callbacks under BC++. John Munsch "I do not tinker :-)"