Mail Archives: djgpp/1995/10/15/03:52:25
On 27 Sep 1995, Terence Abbott (t DOT s DOT abbott AT larc DOT nasa DOT gov) wrote:
>> Having used Borland since its first release and DJGPP for the past 3
>> years, the overwhelming advantage of using Borland for code development
>> is its debugger. It typically takes me 3-4 times longer to find
>> a problem using gbd or ladybug than it does with Borland. My current
>> development environment is Borland with the PharLap DOS extender. If
>> an equivalent debugger (with graphics support) were available for DJGPP,
>> I'd probably switch over to it for both development and run-time code
>> generation.
>> So to me, the big argument for the Borland IDE is NOT THE EDITOR, it is
>> the capabilities of the debugger.
Amen! The gdb interface under MS-DOS or Linux is vastly inferior, IMHO,
than Turbo Debugger. I tried xwpe to try to come close to the wonderful
Borland environment (under Linux) but that shoddy piece of software either
seg faults or simply hangs with the most basic of commands.
I will grant that gcc is a great compiler and that gdb is powerful -- but
RMS's belief that "all the world's a tty" doesn't compare to Borland's
interface with the debugger.
--
=============================================================================
Bob Nelson: Dallas, Texas, U.S.A. - bnelson AT netcom DOT com
Linux for fun, M$ for $$$...and the NFL for what really counts!
=============================================================================
- Raw text -