🎉 Celebrating 25 Years of GameDev.net! 🎉
Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!
C++Builder vs Visual C++
Author
What do you guys think is better. I have them both but I dont know which is better.
JmarsKoder: Founder of "The Minds of Kosine" http://www.kosine.cjb.net/
A group for the most passionate coders. "The Art of Code"
Have both , rarely use C++ Builder , very rarely indeed . Usually use VB or MFC for RAD. Just my $0.02
I have both the VC++ 6 and B. C++Builder 4, but I have never used my Borland compiler, because I had bad experience with B. C++Builder 3.
The only Borland compiler, I ever liked was Borland C++ 5.02, but it''s rather old now ):
Also I have never forgiven borland for using PASCAL code in C++Builder, which makes the builds with VCL too large and slow!
By the way do anyone know when VC++ 7 is released?
The only Borland compiler, I ever liked was Borland C++ 5.02, but it''s rather old now ):
Also I have never forgiven borland for using PASCAL code in C++Builder, which makes the builds with VCL too large and slow!
By the way do anyone know when VC++ 7 is released?
I use C++ Builder all the time. But which is better really depends on what you''re using it for. Map editors and other tools are really easy to build in C++ Builder. If you want to be able to share your code with other people use Visual C++.
I personally don''t think that the fact that Object Pascal was used in VCL to be a big deal. After all when talking about compilers from the same company the intermediate representation and back end of the compilers are essentially the same. (IMO, if anything the Pascal builds are generally a step ahead of their C++ compilers.) The reason why VCL is such a large build and slow link is because is does so darn much, not because it was programmed in Pascal. Not to mention that it''s binary compatible with Delphi. And remember this is Borland corporation, whose first product was Turbo Pascal.
I personally don''t think that the fact that Object Pascal was used in VCL to be a big deal. After all when talking about compilers from the same company the intermediate representation and back end of the compilers are essentially the same. (IMO, if anything the Pascal builds are generally a step ahead of their C++ compilers.) The reason why VCL is such a large build and slow link is because is does so darn much, not because it was programmed in Pascal. Not to mention that it''s binary compatible with Delphi. And remember this is Borland corporation, whose first product was Turbo Pascal.
We use Builder alot at work (not game programming, unfortunately). At first, I really liked it. I''d had very little experience with MFC, and had never seen Visual Basic, and thought the GUI creation was great. However, I''ve had a few problems with it since then.
The biggest problem was compatibility. Going from Builder 3 to 4 was a real pain, because all of our 3rd party libraries stopped functioning properly, and we were forced to find/rewrite replacements. Even our own projects, built completly from standard BCB components were troublesome. We''re getting ready to switch from version 4 to 5. ugh..
Another big problem I had was installation on our WinNT network. Granted, many of these problems were solvable, but the installation wasn''t pleasant. Part of the installation requires admin properties, and when you''re not logged in as an admin, components disappear and library file path problems pop up. These were correctable, and were probably partly caused by our lack of NT knowledge, but it could have been made simpler. After all, we had no problems with VC installations.
I really like VC''s debugger when compared to Borland''s. Also, Borland''s function lookups and class browser pale in comparison to VC''s. And MSDN is a huge help. Try looking up Win32 API functions in the Borland help files.
I guess this is turning into a rather long rant.. sorry. There are a few things I do like about Builder. Like with VB, third party libraries are plentiful, and anything that makes my life easier is a godsend. Also it''s great when I want to slap together a quick GUI to test something. (I guess I could use VB, but I honestly don''t know it as well as BCB.)
Jesse Chounard
stinkygoop@crosswinds.net
The biggest problem was compatibility. Going from Builder 3 to 4 was a real pain, because all of our 3rd party libraries stopped functioning properly, and we were forced to find/rewrite replacements. Even our own projects, built completly from standard BCB components were troublesome. We''re getting ready to switch from version 4 to 5. ugh..
Another big problem I had was installation on our WinNT network. Granted, many of these problems were solvable, but the installation wasn''t pleasant. Part of the installation requires admin properties, and when you''re not logged in as an admin, components disappear and library file path problems pop up. These were correctable, and were probably partly caused by our lack of NT knowledge, but it could have been made simpler. After all, we had no problems with VC installations.
I really like VC''s debugger when compared to Borland''s. Also, Borland''s function lookups and class browser pale in comparison to VC''s. And MSDN is a huge help. Try looking up Win32 API functions in the Borland help files.
I guess this is turning into a rather long rant.. sorry. There are a few things I do like about Builder. Like with VB, third party libraries are plentiful, and anything that makes my life easier is a godsend. Also it''s great when I want to slap together a quick GUI to test something. (I guess I could use VB, but I honestly don''t know it as well as BCB.)
Jesse Chounard
stinkygoop@crosswinds.net
quote: The reason why VCL is such a large build and slow link is because is does so darn much, not because it was programmed in Pascal.
Well perhaps you right, but I have read in a Builder book, that B. Builder needs code to convert the librays from PASCAL to C++ and this makes code bigger and slower.
This was written in a Builder book not in a VC++ book, but I don´t know B. C++Builder that well anymore, because I have choosen to forget all about it and use VC++
Why would it need to convert Pascal to C++ code? They are just standard OMF object modules. Specify an entry point, and link it. No different than linking in a C/C++ object module. Really the only downside to using Pascal code in VCL is that the order of constructor calls in inheritence is slightly weird.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement