borland vs. microsoft

[serdar]

Hi. Does anybody say that what is better borland c++ or visual c++?
Which compiler does have more help?

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

Hi. Does anybody say that what is better borland c++ or visual c++?
Which compiler does have more help?

As far as I know, Borland has dropped the support for C++ (that is it
does not intend to create a newer version of C++ Builder), and keeps Delphi.


However there are other C++ compiler manufacturers for Windows except
from MS, like Intel.

 

[Surendra Singhi]

As far as I know, Borland has dropped the support for C++ (that is it
does not intend to create a newer version of C++ Builder), and keeps
Delphi.


However there are other C++ compiler manufacturers for Windows except
from MS, like Intel.

I have programmed in Borland C++. Borland can no longer keep up with
Microsoft, they have changed their strategy to focus on JBuilder, their
killer application.
About 5-10 years back Borland was THE compiler, no longer Microsoft has
successfully killed another competetition.

I have heard Intel's compiler is good. You can try that. There are few
sort of open source c++ compiler for windows too ex- Dev C++

http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html

HTH

 

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Does anybody say that what is better Borland C++ or Visual C++?
Which compiler does have more help?

The GNU C++ compiler is way better.

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

I have programmed in Borland C++. Borland can no longer keep up with
Microsoft, they have changed their strategy to focus on JBuilder, their
killer application.
About 5-10 years back Borland was THE compiler, no longer Microsoft has
successfully killed another competetition.

I am not sure about the "can not keep up" part. I think they pretty
could, after all they support C#. "Delphi 2005" is both Delphi and C#
Builder, and it is pretty good for C#.


You may download the Delphi 2005 Enterprise edition trial and check
yourself.

I have heard Intel's compiler is good. You can try that. There are few
sort of open source c++ compiler for windows too ex- Dev C++

http://www.bloodshed.net/devcpp.html

Yes I know it. Of course there are numerous C++ compilers, but I had
..NET especially in mind. Of course after Longhorn, all Windows compilers
will support "WinFX" (.NET) so things will be better then.

 

[Duane Hebert]

As far as I know, Borland has dropped the support for C++ (that is it
does not intend to create a newer version of C++ Builder), and keeps Delphi.

Borland is supposed to make an announcement on Dec 15 concerning their
future plans with C++. It's likely that they will continue the CBX line and bundle
BCB with Delphi in some way but that's only a guess.

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

Borland is supposed to make an announcement on Dec 15 concerning their
future plans with C++. It's likely that they will continue the CBX line and bundle
BCB with Delphi in some way but that's only a guess.

That would be great, provided that it would support .NET pretty well (as
Delphi .NET and C# Builder which are bundled together).

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

That would be great, provided that it would support .NET pretty well (as
Delphi .NET and C# Builder which are bundled together).

Actually I just checked my dusty C++ Builder bookmarks that I have been
keeping and in summary I came to this:


http://cppbuilderdevjournal.com/free_issue/vol8_num9.4.htm


Man it looks like those people have no clue about C++, .NET etc!


At first, no rational developer is going to use C++ Builder/C++ Builder
X (I did not know that they were different products!), that does not
support .NET, provided that in the Longhorn era (due to 2006) all code
will be managed (the Windows API will be WinFX, that is .NET).


Also MS supported .NET from within C++ from the very first edition of VS
..NET. So what is this all about that now MS *will* provide .NET support
for C++? Are they living to another planet?


Also I never understood why VCL was always written in Pascal, but this
is the least important issue of all.


All in all, I do not think they will have much success on the C++ field,
because it looks like they have no clue on what is going on!

 

[Jeroen Wenting]

The GNU C++ compiler is way better.

It isn't and you should know that.
Unless of course you're an open source vigilante whose sole measure of an
application is whether it's open source...

Performance of created executables is consistently poor when using GCC
compared to Borland or Microsoft compilers compiling the same code.

 

[Surendra Singhi]

It isn't and you should know that.
Unless of course you're an open source vigilante whose sole measure of an
application is whether it's open source...

Performance of created executables is consistently poor when using GCC
compared to Borland or Microsoft compilers compiling the same code.

Agreed. But Borland is no longer interested in C++.

Microsoft always hated C++, inspite of (VC++) and everything.
So, for the long run "gcc" is a better choice, as it is not dependent on
anyone company and as long as there are C++ users it will continue to
evolve.

Ultimately depends on what the OPs need are.

 

[Surendra Singhi]

I am not sure about the "can not keep up" part. I think they pretty
could, after all they support C#. "Delphi 2005" is both Delphi and C#
Builder, and it is pretty good for C#.


You may download the Delphi 2005 Enterprise edition trial and check
yourself.

The reason I said that was because, they were fed up of Microsoft's
shenanigans, it is tough to compete with a company which develops OS,
and API's and everything, especially when you write a compiler for
language like C++, which has pretty low level features.

The found it hard to stop Microsoft in their pursuit of becoming the
everything company.

 

[Rob Williscroft]

Jeroen Wenting wrote in in
comp.lang.c++:

It isn't and you should know that.
Unless of course you're an open source vigilante whose sole measure of
an application is whether it's open source...

Or Standard conformance, which is my primary measure, yours is presumably
optimization or is it that the product isn't open source ...

Performance of created executables is consistently poor when using GCC
compared to Borland or Microsoft compilers compiling the same code.

When they compile the code, g++ (3.4+) is far better than both compilers,
g++ 3.x (prior to 3.4) are better than Borland 5.x and comparible with
MSVC 7.1, but if I had to choose one it would be g++ 3.2/3 it has bugs
but at least I can workaround them.

The above doesn't apply to Borlands CBuilderX of course but thats a
just a preview anyway.

Rob.

 

[Larry Brasfield]

Microsoft always hated C++, inspite of (VC++) and everything.

What an amazing insight! I wonder why, in light of that
divination, so many product groups at Microsoft use C++
to create what they sell. They must be masochists all!

Mr. Singhi, you had better keep your day job (if you have one)
rather than going into mind-reading or sooth-saying.

 

[gipsy boy]

What an amazing insight! I wonder why, in light of that
divination, so many product groups at Microsoft use C++
to create what they sell. They must be masochists all!

Who? I was under the impression most have switched to C#.NET.

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

Who? I was under the impression most have switched to C#.NET.

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys/cppcli.htm

 

[Matej Barac]

The GNU C++ compiler is way better.

The Visual Studio UnintelliSense®

http://www.thedailywtf.com/images/9/o_ThanksForTheHelp.gif

 

[Duane Hebert]

Man it looks like those people have no clue about C++, .NET etc!

Their marketing/management guys don't seem to.

Also I never understood why VCL was always written in Pascal, but this
is the least important issue of all.

VCL is written in Delphi. Not the same thing as Pascal. Delphi
is a proprietary Borland language. Some of the implementation
of classes etc. are different than C++ (ctor/dtor order, virtual
constructors etc.) Some of the problems that this can cause
have made it more important of an issue.

All in all, I do not think they will have much success on the C++ field,
because it looks like they have no clue on what is going on!

They haven't had an actively supported C++ offering in nearly a year.
It will be interesting to see what they announce on Dec 15.

 

[Bob Hairgrove]

VCL is written in Delphi. Not the same thing as Pascal. Delphi
is a proprietary Borland language.

Actually, it is a language called "Object Pascal" ... Delphi, as I
understand it, includes the Delphi visual IDE which generates VCL code
in this language known as Object Pascal.

Some of the implementation
of classes etc. are different than C++ (ctor/dtor order, virtual
constructors etc.) Some of the problems that this can cause
have made it more important of an issue.

In addition, the VCL pollutes the global namespace with all their own
namespaces (e.g. "System::") unless you take unusual precautions to
prevent this, and then almost nothing works the way it should. One of
the more blatant mistakes is when defining AnsiString support in VCL
streams, there is a "using namespaces std;" in one of their headers.

Of course, if you don't use the VCL, you can avoid these problems, but
whenever a COM object (ActiveX) is added to the project, Borland
Builder automatically forces you to use VCL. It might be possible to
use the command-line tool MIDL, but I never tried it.

Also, the MDI implementation in Borland Builder 5 was broken ... is
this any better in Builder 6?

They haven't had an actively supported C++ offering in nearly a year.
It will be interesting to see what they announce on Dec 15.

If this is another of their "open letters", it's been announced more
than a year ago and never happened. There are standing jokes about it
on the Borland newsgroups, just Google for "open letter" and
"Borland".

I like their free command line compiler, and I love the way Builder 5
(or 6) let you whip up a GUI application in almost no time at all. But
it comes at a price, just as MFC does.

 

[Duane Hebert]

Actually, it is a language called "Object Pascal" ... Delphi, as I
understand it, includes the Delphi visual IDE which generates VCL code
in this language known as Object Pascal.

I just attribute this to Borland's bizarre logic when it comes to naming
conventions. I've never heard of Object Pascal except with Delphi
but at any rate, it amounts to the same thing. It uses a proprietary
language, based loosely on Pascal.

In addition, the VCL pollutes the global namespace with all their own
namespaces (e.g. "System::") unless you take unusual precautions to
prevent this, and then almost nothing works the way it should. One of
the more blatant mistakes is when defining AnsiString support in VCL
streams, there is a "using namespaces std;" in one of their headers.

This was worse with BCB5/RogueWave as there were using statements
in many of the headers.

Of course, if you don't use the VCL, you can avoid these problems, but
whenever a COM object (ActiveX) is added to the project, Borland
Builder automatically forces you to use VCL. It might be possible to
use the command-line tool MIDL, but I never tried it.

Without VCL there's not much point in using BCB these days. I think
that was the idea behind CBX.

If this is another of their "open letters", it's been announced more
than a year ago and never happened. There are standing jokes about it
on the Borland newsgroups, just Google for "open letter" and
"Borland".

Some of the Borland people and the teamB people have been indicating
that this time there will be some information released. There are rumors
that BCB will be bundled with Delphi and that CBX will be getting a new
release with a new compliant compiler and Dinkumware libraries.

Having lived through the previous promises of "open letters" I'm as sceptical
as anyone but who knows? I would hate to see MS lose the competition.

I like their free command line compiler, and I love the way Builder 5
(or 6) let you whip up a GUI application in almost no time at all. But
it comes at a price, just as MFC does.

I haven't used the free compiler much but I think it's cool that they were one
of the first commercial companies in the Windows market to release their
compilers for free. As for GUI apps, BCB will definitely let you generate
a GUI application in no time at all. The problem comes in with the non-GUI
part of the code that depends on standard compliance.

I would like to see them update CBX as it's supposed to be cross platform
and with a good compiler and no IDE bugs, it would be interesting. Even
if you'd need Qt or something to develop GUI apps.

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

VCL is written in Delphi. Not the same thing as Pascal.

Delphi is an Object Oriented Pascal.