which one is better? or faster?
i'm lame and work on VC and alittle ASM but some my Best friend tell me work on CBulider .
do u advice me?
Posted on 2003-12-30 00:50:49 by AliMH
CBuilder is more RAD than visual c++. If you want to design your programs by dragging controls onto a form them you'd probably like C++ Builder better.
Posted on 2003-12-30 04:10:56 by Odyssey
In my opinion, for or a Masm user,the best choice is M$ Visual C++ It integrates %100 with
Masm. Naturally, one might consider using other C/C++ compilers fitting his needs.
Posted on 2003-12-30 04:44:09 by Vortex
i'm lame but i love Power and never waste my time with RAD Language for just some hours .
i wanna more Power and have a pretty feuture and i think that M$ is better than Borland .
Posted on 2003-12-30 15:46:09 by AliMH
C++ builder generates pretty bad code.
MS VC++ or the intel C++ compiler are the best - intel doesn't come with an IDE though.
If you want rad, f*ck borland c++ builder and go Delphi or VB instead.

Vortex, what's with the M$ shit?
Posted on 2003-12-31 12:14:37 by f0dder
I find it a pity that intel C compiler requires vc++ to run. yikes. Need to waste so much money just for it.
Posted on 2003-12-31 12:17:16 by roticv
Another alternative, a synthesis of C and asm,Sphinx C-- is also an interesting language.

http://sheker.chat.ru/index_e.htm
Posted on 2003-12-31 12:56:07 by Vortex
roticv, it didn't require vc++ to run when I checked it last. And vc++ definitely isn't a waste of money ;)

Vortex, does sphinx c-- have a hardcore code optimizer?
Posted on 2004-01-01 00:40:36 by f0dder
fodder,

I was testing out Intel compiler 8. Ouch, the compiler complained that there is no vc installed. :sweat:
Posted on 2004-01-01 02:14:39 by roticv
Hi f0dder,

Sphinx C-- offers some optimization opportunities;but ofcourse M$ VC++ has the best optimization capabilities.
Posted on 2004-01-01 12:09:02 by Vortex
roticv, ouch? :s - are you completely sure about this? Not just the IDE integration that is complaining? I think it's v7 or something like that I played around with... been a while though. Oh well, should probably still be possible to rip icc8 and have it work without MSVC, but whether their license allows this is another question I guess...
Posted on 2004-01-01 15:13:53 by f0dder
Something like that... Hehe icc8 lite? :grin:
Posted on 2004-01-02 05:58:54 by roticv

which one is better? or faster?
i'm lame and work on VC and alittle ASM but some my Best friend tell me work on CBulider .
do u advice me?


Compilation with MS Visual C++ is faster than Borland.:alright:
Posted on 2004-01-09 05:15:14 by Eternal Idol Birmingham
It's faster, too? Nice since it generates a lot better code :)
Posted on 2004-01-09 06:04:21 by f0dder
Yep, really, really faster.

Here at work I use bassically C\C++ and I try to develop code who's compatible with both VC++ and Borland Builder.
The code is always compiled faster with VC++.

Regards,
Mariano.
Posted on 2004-01-09 06:08:50 by Eternal Idol Birmingham

I find it a pity that intel C compiler requires vc++ to run. yikes. Need to waste so much money just for it.


it has command line ...
it has vc integration becuz they didn't wanted to write IDE :D
Posted on 2004-01-09 13:04:31 by wizzra
I purchased C++Builder a while back and I liked it at first. It was nice having a GUI (Delphi style) but in all, I find it slow and buggy. Pricing is a nightmare and I don't want to keep dumping money into it.

I find Intel C, Visual C++, and Metrowerks Codewarrior to be the best. (Yes, better than GCC). Codewarrior actually isn't bad at all but there are so many features I take for granted in the Visual Studio IDE (plus I get it in my Universal Subscription) that I don't bother with the others. Metrowerks was a good compiler and has good acedemic value to it (most a stripped down version compared to Visual C++ but doesn't add the MS specific stuff). Has a crappy disassembler though (doesn't even contain a listing).


Thanks,
Shawn
Posted on 2004-01-09 15:36:27 by _Shawn
Well, nowadays I'm developing an application at work wich uses Borland Builder (including VCL), I want to kill myself.

705KB, including all the libraries, and what it does? Nothing, a couple of stupid resizes...


Borland Builder is to C\C++ what Visual Basic is to Basic.

I could do this application in Assembler, it will take a couple of days more but it will be at least 10 times smaller and 10 times faster.

VCL is worse than MFC.
Posted on 2004-01-16 04:25:48 by Eternal Idol Birmingham
Eternal Idol Birmingham,

The choice of development tool was yours :grin:. You opted for fast development instead of of having a fast program had it been written with asm. I think you knew what you were getting yourself into. :grin:
Posted on 2004-01-16 05:20:42 by Odyssey

Eternal Idol Birmingham,

The choice of development tool was yours :grin:. You opted for fast development instead of of having a fast program had it been written with asm. I think you knew what you were getting yourself into. :grin:


I knew, but I'm not the boss... I'm must use the development tool that the boss told me, not the one that I want, I can suggest to him that it would be better to use plain C or asm and I did it,
I can't go any further.
Posted on 2004-01-16 05:22:15 by Eternal Idol Birmingham