From:	sumatose AT NOSPAM DOT usa DOT net
Newsgroups:	comp.lang.c++,comp.os.msdos.djgpp,rec.games.programmer
Subject:	Re: The numer 1 compiler, DJGPP or MSVC Here's a good rating comparision
Date:	Fri, 12 Sep 1997 10:41:42 -0400
Organization:	VTL
Lines:	15
Message-ID:	<MPG.e831eac63399e6098982e@news.videotron.net>
References:	<3412BD25 DOT 1F30 AT mho DOT net> <3412DDA8 DOT C428AF45 AT a DOT crl DOT com> <341316EA DOT E14 AT mho DOT net> <34158665 DOT 8731090 AT news DOT concentric DOT net> <34148F08 DOT 7A16 AT pacbell DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	ppp042.216.msherb.videotron.net
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

In group rec.games.programmer, Ron Hiler says...
> This comment is of some concern to me.  I use Borland compilers, and am
> about to upgrade to the new version (either Builder or 5.0 (right?)). 
> Is there some significant reason Borland is bad?  Should I go with
> something else? (Please dont say DJGPP, I'm addicted to the IDE).

I have had problems compiling 100% valid C++ code with borland 
4.2, and never looked at the product again.  Our program compiled 
under MSVC 1.x, CodeWarrior and Think C under Macintosh, but 
borland just refused to compile it.  We have moved it to other 
compiler since then with no problems.  Optimization wise, borland 
lags behind.  Without MFC, it's rather useless also.  (Builder 
has its own class library which is a Delphi look-alike, but fails 
to be as easy by introducing pointers and odd constructs. ).
 

- Raw text -