Board index » cppbuilder » Re: Differences between BCB6 and TC++

2006-10-20 07:23:59 AM
cppbuilder105
pbk++ < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
 

"mr_organic" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
 

At 21:53:11, 19.10.2006, pbk++ wrote:
called "partial molar pregnancy"), but one can partially support a
library or a standard.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] rvelthuis.de/
"I am not young enough to know everything."
-- Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)
 

{smallsort}

David Dean < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
out of the box (i.e., with no adjustments in boost's code).
(It was one of the things VC developers did due to a lot
of demand from customers.) Now, I am pretty sure that VC8
does have problems with some of boost's newer code. But,
TTBOMK, BCC for many years hasn't never been at the point
where it compiled all of boost even /with/ workarounds in
boost. That's sad, because BCC once was a lot better than
VC. But VC caught up, and Borland didn't do much for std
conformance since. IMO they aren't even in the same league
anymore.
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org
"The sarcasm is mightier than the sword."
Eric Jarvis
 

Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
(or something similar) on the box, IIRC. We're talking
about the 3rd version after that one.
And regarding boost, it's more that boost supported
BCC than the other way around. The boosters put a lot
of efford into keeping their code compiling with BCC,
Borland, OTOH, put nothing into this. So it sounds
sarcastic to say "BCC partially supports boost", to
say the least.
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org
"The sarcasm is mightier than the sword."
Eric Jarvis
 

"Hendrik Schober" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news:4540b18b$1
@newsgroups.borland.com:
template specializations, typelist/typename stuff, and in native code-
generation and optimization.
The compiler in BDS 2006 is essentially unchanged from the five-year-old
compiler shipped in C++Builder 5; it's been tweaked some here and there,
but I get the feeling that the Borland guys are almost afraid to touch it
for fear of breaking something. The long neglect of this compiler has
left it two generations behind the other C++ offerings: Intel, Microsoft,
and GNU all offer more compliant and performant C++ compilers than
Borland now.
I've often wondered what DTG/DevCo's strategy is for C++ beyond just
being another "Delphi flavor" for developing VCL apps. What's really
needed is a complete overhaul of the C++ toolchain: the compiler, linker,
make tool (and makefile generator), headers (the current Win32 headers
are pretty out-of-date). The Dinkumware standard library is world-class,
but needs an optimized compiler to be as performant as other
alternatives. There's also going to be a growing need to target multi-
core and multi-processor targets.
In short, there's no *easy* way forward. I seriously doubt that DTG/DevCo
is going to have the wherewithal to invest in a new C++ compiler
toolchain. I remain convinced that they'd do better to fork the GCC
compiler and add support for the VCL into it -- I know this would be a
large amount of work, but it is surely less work than creating a new
compiler toolchain from scratch! Plus there is a large body of developers
who know and understand GCC. (A side-benefit might be that DTG/DevCo get
a toe in the Linux/UNIX market with this strategy.)
Eh. I don't see it happening. DTG/DevCo is first and foremost a Pascal
shop, and Delphi is their bread and butter. I think we C++ guys are being
a bit naive about how important we are in DTG's view of the world.
Regards,
mr_organic
 

At 15:00:27, 26.10.2006, Hendrik Schober wrote:
probably true, at the time.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] rvelthuis.de/
"No Sane man will dance." -- Cicero (106-43 B.C.)
 

Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote:
close) on the box.
.a
 

"Alex Bakaev [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
--
Chris (TeamB);
 

At 21:12:35, 26.10.2006, Alex Bakaev [TeamB] wrote:
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] rvelthuis.de/
"Humor is the only test of gravity, and gravity of humor; for a
subject which will not bear raillery is suspicious, and a jest
which will not bear serious examination is false wit."
-- Aristotle (384 BC-322 BC)
 

"Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
conformance with support for STLPort" (with the word "Enhanced" in
boldface).
My C++Builder 5 Trial CD edition reads "The power and portability of ANSI
C++".
FWIW.
Regards,
mr_organic
 

In article <45411e71$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >, Mr_organic wrote:
Enhanced! Latest ANSI/ISO C++
with "Enhanced!" in boldface.
This is ticked in both columns: "Professional" and "Enterprise".
Cheers,
Daniel.
 

[some generously snipped context re-inserted]
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
between "fully ANSI C++ conforming" vs. "Full ANSI
C++ conformance" and "or something similar" vs. "or
very close" that makes you deny one and admit the
other?
is wrong. And then, later, you admit that, perhaps,
the fact might be true, but that you do not even
have a possibility to check on it? If you don't
{*word*30}ing know what you're talking about, why don't
you just shut up like everyone else does?!
The two of us have been fruitlessly quarreling
over such things here much too often for my taste
and this attitude of your's to deny the obvious,
repeat the marketing hype, and fight over little
side-points which distract from the plain facts
had already annoyed me to no end before. But this
is the final nail in the coffin of my opinion
about your statements.
Geh und verkriech Dich irgendwo.
For (from?) the record:
groups.google.de/group/borland.public.cppbuilder.language/msg/b884a27ba3111bbd
"...in fact the box headliner reads <Hi-Performance
ANSI-C++ Visual Development>" With (most of) the
marketing hype cut out, to me this reads "ANSI-C++
Development".
groups.google.de/group/borland.public.cppbuilder.non-technical/msg/be128669a3e91aee
"The product description on the package claims
<complete compatibility with ANSI/ISO C++
templates>(translated from German) which is
simply a lie." There's very little to add to
that.
Schobi
P.S.: If this is a flame, it's my first one.
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org
"The sarcasm is mightier than the sword."
Eric Jarvis
 

"Hendrik Schober" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
something really good, something that I might want to say myself.
Thanks.
 

"vortic" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message