Board index » cppbuilder » Re: BCB 5 or BCB 6?

2006-02-27 09:32:56 PM
cppbuilder111
Larry Griffiths wrote:
Both had quirks that made them annoying at times, both were very useful
tools. Generally, I found that the improvement in BCB6 were offset to
an extent by some new IDE issues, but nothing we couldn't work around.
On balance, once we had settled with each, I would say I definitely
preferred BCB6, and we are just now porting to BCB2006.
Given the choice today, I would take BCB6.
Next week I expect to say 'BCB2006' once I have got past
new-environment syndrome, and am productive again. There is a lot to
like about the new tool, but BCB6 is a very familiar tool now, and
building familiarity takes time <g>
One key difference is if you expect your .tds files (used by the
de{*word*81}) to grow large. There is a limit in BCB5 of 32mb for the tds
file, which we hit just as we were migrating to 6 (lucky timing!)
Our tds files are now hitting 60mb, so we hope the limit is beyond 64mb
in BCB2006 ;?)
--
AlisdairM(TeamB)
 

I would like opinions on Builder 5 verses Builder 6 from those of you who
have used both versions.
If you had a preference, would you choose Builder 5 or Builder 6.
 

Personally, BCB6 was better than BCB5 but you had
to remove ClassExplorer to make it stable enough.
However, BDS2006 is *much* better than both of
these and is supported whereas BCB6 is no longer
supported.
HTH Pete
"Larry Griffiths" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message

{smallsort}

Larry Griffiths wrote:
--
Andrue Cope [TeamB]
[Bicester, Uk]
info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html
 

Wow, Im surprised to hear that BDS2006 is better than both.
We purchased 5 enterprise versions of BDS2006 and they have been shelved
because they crash all the time. I downloaded the trial version of BDS2006
and have experienced the internal compiler errors myself along with header
problems.
"Andrue Cope [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message

Larry,
Please don't shelve them. It's worth working with Borland to
get to the bottom of what the problems are. What problems
did you encounter?
Rgds Pete
"Larry Griffiths" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message

Was BDS2006 patch 1 installed? Were you having problems creating new
applications before any third party controls had been installed? Was the
crash on startup? Was your build environment Win2000 or above? How much
memory was installed on the machine? ..... you know the drill.
I am among the group of people that believes BDS2006 is superior to BCB6 and
earlier. For what I work with there are no new linker/compiler bugs and the
environment is much more stable.
- Clayton
 

I believe the trial version (Architect) that I downloaded had includes patch
1.
I would get these "internal compiler error" messages.
I got a [C++ Error] stralign.h(102): E2268 Call to undefined function
'wcscpy'
error yesterday inside of a StrAlign.h header during a compile yesterday (i
created a seperate post for that one).
I suppose I can try to get past the header problems again and post a few of
the internal compiler error messages here.
I installed all the products but Im thinking of deleteing them all and only
installing the C++ product.
I would rather have help specific to the product I am using instead of
having to choose between Java, Delphi, C++ and C#. I am hoping that I will
only get help for the product I am installing and that the help for the
other products will go away when I choose to only install C++.
"Clayton Arends" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message

"Pete Fraser" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
message news:44030998$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
- Dennis
 

Im using Windows XP with service pack 2 applied with 512 meg of memory, no
third party controls.
I removed the install and then installed BDS2006 again but only selected C++
Builder.
Startup time has been cut in half. I created a new static library and added
the .cpp files one at a time and I am having better luck now.
The help files still seem to have stuff for other things like java even
though I only installed Builder C++. I would rather not have to weed out/
wade through all of the extra trivial information from other products when
all I wan't is the help for C++ Builder.
"Clayton Arends" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message

On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:12:37 -0800, "Dennis Jones" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
wrote:
from toolsfactory that I miss much now while working with bcb2006
--
Vladimir Ulchenko aka vavan
 

You can filter the help to remove bits you don't want.
HTH Pete
"Larry Griffiths" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message

I wondered if it had a filter. More stuff to explore on top of the too much
stuff to explore already. I wish I were 18 again.
"Pete Fraser" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
message news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...

I've been using Borland products since the eighties, starting with Turbo
Pascal 5.0 and TASM 2.0. Up till now they've always been affordable as well
as easy to use. I love working with BCB 5.0 (which I Currently am using),
Loved working with 6.0 demo but just couldn't afford to purchase, and
shelling out $1100 for 2006 is completely insane!. Sorry Borland, you've
priced yourselves out of my market. But back on point, one of the features
of BCB6 that I really enjoyed was the grouping of Unit related files under a
single tab in the file editor; made for switching between header, code and
form files much easier.
 

David Pratt wrote:
dollars which IMO is quite reasonable for a professional development
tool.
--
Andrue Cope [TeamB]
[Bicester, Uk]
info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html