Ok, my school has both Visual C++ 6.0 and Borland Builder 5.0, but they''re about to make us use Borland (right now we''re using the DOS borland compiler...sad). I use Visual C++ 6.0 at home, and I was wondering which one I should get the teacher to let us use, I personally like Visual C++ 6.0 a lot, and I''d rather stick with it because to my knowledge it''s better. If anyone knows which one is better, let me know, and tell me what''s better about them so that I can persuade my teacher to use it.

Before I used Visual C++, I used to use Borland C++Builder 3. The VCL (Borland''s MFC equivalent) is organized much better than MFC IMHO, and the IDE is fairly good. The code editor for Builder pisses me off sometimes, but oh well..

I think it would probably be a good thing to get experience in Builder too, just in case. It can''t hurt to know how to use one more IDE/Compiler, especially since their Windows programming libraries are very different. It''s nice to use something different sometimes.

Also, depending on the skill level of the other kids in the class, it would probably be easier to use C++Builder with VCL than VC++ with either MFC or the WinAPI.

I''m a Borland user and advocate. I will always suggest Borland over VC++. The only time you should use VC++ (in my opinion) is if a company that you''re working for has most of their employees using it, then it is a good idea to stay compatible throughout whatever they have you working on.

Null and Void

I must say that the only thing I did not like over Borland Builder is that it gave me a feel of lack of control over what I was doing. VERY quick and good for getting a visual screen up and running though - visual as in say a window with a menu and some buttons.

Although, I would prefer old Borland C++ V5... But I must say I do use VC6 just to be upto date.

-----------------------------------------------
All messages are of my own personal opinion and
not meant to offend. But if they do - tough :)

Neuro.

i had been using VC 4 and Turbo C++ at home prior to using BCB at school for classes. i didn''t like BCB at first, but it was ok. it was far better than VC 4, however, the text editor was BY FAR worse. in fact. i think it was worse than VB, but that''s just my opinion.
i use VC 6 at work and home and like it.



crazy166
some people think i'm crazy, some people know i am

First off, let me say that I am a Borland Adovate, so take everything I say with a tint of skeptism (just a little
1) Borlands compiler is better then VCs. Its far more up to date then VC''s, and it is faster. Much faster. Both of these two are FACTS not opionions (yes I timed them)
2) What''s so bad about borlands editor?
I find that Borland''s is better, it has more default syntax highlighting (yes, I am too lazy to change it in VC, I know I can
3) VCL vs MFC / Pure Win32
In my opinion, VCL is much better, as it speeds up programming time, and has a new way of doing things (properties, handlers, etc). Even if you''re mainly code - based ( like all of us : Go Game Programming !!!)
The VCL is much better designed, compared to the MFC, and so it will automatically lean you towards good OOP and class design.
4) Value for money (ok, not so knowlegable here )
First, I use the Borland BCB 5 Pro compiler that my dad''s company bought, so I don''t know how much it costs. But it is comparable to VC''s cost (300-500? I guess)
However BCB compiles 2 languages for the price of 1: C++ and Delphi (Object Pascal on steroids . And, its good if you use Delphi, cos you learn about other programming paradigms, and control structures, etc. Also Delphi has some advantages over C++. I use it in bits, to do my pluggable factories. BCB will seamlessly compile both. Function calls, variables, etc. Automatic header file translation, too.
BUT wait Its not a rigged contest (like Mindscape Linux vs. NT was!) VC has a built in profiler (very good!) and it is always the first to new Windows tech''s (of course). And it is the more standard standard.
5) Saving coding time.
In my BCB library, 5 minutes, ''bout 50 line of code and I have a workable pong game. 1 hour or 2, and I have a tetris game (with some game design bugs, tho'' . Not because I type fast, but because I can skip about 1/2 the code. - Allocation, Deallocation, basic Windows stuff, Setters and Getters.

And FINALLY and MOST IMPORANTANTLY (in my view

KYLIX!!!! (I wish I kew how to boldidize stuff )
If you use OpenGL, and use BCB, and make sure that you don''t make some Win32 only error (mainly captialization of file names, etc.) You can recompile under Kylix (BCB for Linux/KDE/Gnome) and it will work! Automatically! NO CODE CHANGES!!!!

Since I am I Linux advocate too, that''s important.

For fairness, a VC adovate should pop into view any moment now


------------------------------
What should I put here? You tell me.

Please put on VC basis earmuffs:

If you've never used either program before, you'll put putting together UI's with Builder *much* quicker, but you'll be building applications with VC much quicker. I quess it might be better now with v3, but the debugger for C++ Builder v2 was pretty sorry compared to VC5. And now that the public propertires/methods pop-up has *finally* been added to VC6, its nice to code with once you're familar with the win32api & MFC.

In my data structures class I built my template classes in VC (tested with console apps) & made my front ends with Builder

...

And I would sincerely like to know the advantages of Delphi over Builder and/or VC6. Forgive my desire for dynamically sized arrays

Edited by - Magmai Kai Holmlor on September 24, 2000 1:26:47 AM

Actually, I have used both MSVC++ 6.0 and Borland Builder 5.0 as well as Borland C++ for Windows 5.02 (compiler) - which yes is the base compiler for Borland Builder, although has a different include and library set and different IDE.

Borland Builder is a great application I find when you want to build utilities, and Dialog, MDI or SDI based applications. Graphics is another topic, especially since Borland Builder from the most of my usage works best and is designed best to be used with VCL. Even though there are DirectX VCL sets, they are not as good as actualy learning DirectX API (which believe it or not is not very difficult at all.. and requires next to no knowledge about Win32 and COM.

Borland C++ 5.02 of Windows has many options, including a 16bit compiler *shrug* which Builder and VC++ do not offer. It also comes shipped with MFC includes and libraries in which you can compiler into Builder to run MFC code, as well as compile MFC code with that compiler yourself. I believe Borland said "5.02, Builder''s best compliment." It also supports old OWL, and works great with Win32 code and DirectX as it is designed for such. Actually my 5.02 compiler ships with the DirectX 3.0 libararies and include files.

Now Borland products have a very easy to use and fairly powerfull IDE, but I find that with Builder it is again based around the VCL system, while with 5.02 it stays fairly generic.

MSVC++ 6.0, like Builder is 32bit only, but has default support for MFC (obviously); however last I checked, no support for OWL or VCL components. MSVC++ 6.0 shipd with DirectX 5.0 LIbraries and Includes (I think it is 5.0), but can be easly changed for DirectX 7.0 with the MSDXSDK7.0a debug/retail kit. Now when I first saw MSVC++''s IDE, I was astounded, it has a wonderfull IDE and very pleasant to the eye, especially it class organisation method (while Borland only uses file organisation for projects, with the odd exception of the class viewer for some of their projcts, which still is not very pleasant looking.) Now I did find MSVC++''s IDE to be confusing, and even now I still find it a little bit like that, but in my opinion nothing beats the power of its IDE, and nothing beats its looks.

I used to be Borland Biased, I loved Borland, but I got a copy of MSVC++ Introductory and I loved it, and even though Builder and 5.02 have their uses (Builder for Dialog, SDI and MDI applications, and 5.02 for DOS or 16bit application, and DirectXs) I think MSVC++ is better suited for DirectX, as well as Win32 coding, in fact, I plan on buying a professional copy of Visual C++ 6.0 within the next two weeks.

I hope this helps you,
Clifford Roche

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

My PGP Signature, Locate Public key on domain server.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 for non-commercial use

iQA/AwUBOcbGNN42vCuvqlVSEQI2mQCglnHz5n1VcNacPQKRtSw8SAFGGWMAn1ei
GyvSAwu1npdATbq3BwdhXIA1
=Vm6v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Magmai Kai Holmlor - you can check out Delphi for yourself for free:
http://www.borland.com/delphi/trial5/trialdownload.html

I''m a HUGE Delphi fan. I use Borland C++ and Delphi at work, and I''ve used VC++5 on my own at home. IMHO Delphi just makes everything as simple as possible without sacrificing power and flexability. Even ignoring the VCL completely, I love the way things are done in Object Pascal. We do plain old Windows apps here at my company and I can''t stand doing C++ work anymore (maintaining older code) when I know it could be done in a fraction of the time in Delphi.

I think it depends on what type of applications you are developing. It is definitely a good idea to know how to use both of them. For developing user interfaces and business-type applications, I use BCB. However, when writing DirectX and OpenGL code, there usually isn''t a platform user interface. I don''t want VCL or even MFC getting in the way of my OpenGL code, so I use VC6. In that case, the only platform-specific things are WinMain and WndProc, which makes VCL practically useless.
Along side that, DirectX and OpenGL are just plain harder to use with BCB.