🚀 go-pugleaf

"Rich Mynick" <Rmynick@home.com> wrote in message
news:3AFC2D0F.355DDA17@home.com...

> Could some kind soul offer a few general words as to how substantial the
> differences really are between the C++ (of almost 5 years ago, which
> still seems like an enormously capable program to me), and today's
> latest Builder version?  I don't want to be clinging to an obsolete tool
> that I've grown very comfortable with -- but need some solid reason to
> persuade me that there's more to Builder than just the fact that it's
> the "latest thing."
>
> Thanks for any comments -- RichM

It's the latest thing, man ... what more do you need?

Okay, okay you probably need some more convincing.  There are numerous
reasons why you should convert.  Following are the reasons I can think of:

The biggest reason you'll hear must people tout is ANSI C++ compliance.  BCB
is far more compliant especially since the standard has changed so much in
the last five years.  Borland likes to say somewhere in the 90 percentile.

Another huge reason is the simple nature of development with BCB is far more
productive.  RAD offers more advantages than just simple prototyping.  It
simplifies the development cycle.  I'm not completely familiar with OWL
since I only started using it when BCB came out so I dumped it.  But OWL is
much like MFC in that it is, for the most part, non-visual and therefore
takes a much longer amount of time to make changes.  Using the VCL, simple
changes such as modifying an event handler or changing the size and
alignment can take several seconds.  Doing the same with OWL or MFC can take
minutes and sometimes requires a redesign.

Maybe you're interested in database, ActiveX, COBRA, COM, or
internationalization.  BCB natively offers this functionality.

You might hear that BCB produces executables that are much larger than what
BC++ produces.  This is true for Windows code that makes use of the VCL, and
is built without using runtime packages.  However, for console applications
and generic Windows applications the size of the binary files are very close
to the files produced by BC++.  Probably no larger than 1k to 10k in most
cases.

To be honest there are several reasons why you may not want to upgrade.  The
biggest reason being the instability of the IDE.  Developing with Builder
can be a daunting task when you can be kicked out at any random point in
time.  I have been forced to turn off most of the "niceties" of the IDE just
to keep it stable.  I've learned to recognize when the IDE is getting ready
to give me 'the boot' and exit the IDE and reenter.  This happens at least
once an hour for me.

Builder writes code for you and can actually destroy your code.  It is a
rare event that I lose code anymore since I've grown accustomed to when this
happens but it is a facet of the language you must know about.

You should probably hang on to your current compiler for those applications
that BCB cannot create.  The most well known being 16-bit apps (not that
they're built much anymore but this is a big point if you maintain 16-bit
code).

In summary, programming with BCB is different than BC++.  Getting used to
the component-based design might take a little while but is by far my
favorite part of the language.  The users on the newsgroups are very helpful
in getting a new programmer up and running with BCB.  I believe there are
very few books for Builder 5 but even a book on Builder 1 or Delphi will
give you most of the knowledge you require for using the VCL.

- Clayton