🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <CA7MHK.Eur@fig.citib.com> ghica@fig.citib.com (Renato Ghica) writes:
>
>In article <CA5rGr.Jv3@world.std.com>, timk@world.std.com (Tim King) writes:
>|> Michael Turk <ABMT@musica.macarthur.uws.EDU.AU> writes concerning
>|> Microsoft's Visual C++:
>|> 
>|> >I just installed it and ran into a few problems that indicate that
>|> >it may not be suitable for educational use
>|> 
>|> Spoken as a truly experienced and knowledgable MSVC user.  Exactly how
>|> many hours have you logged with this product?
>
>Irrelevant/non sequitur. Someone teaching or in an educational field
>does not have to waste his/her time by spending hours and hours
>trying to use an off-the-shelf product to determine if it's suitable
>for the classroom. If the students can't use it, it's not suitable.
>If the sample program doesn't compile on the first try, it's not suitable.

It is relevant! You are clearly biased with Borland, so use it and stop wasting 
our time and bandwidth. A teacher after all teachs what they know.

However, if you wish to open up a little more, then consider this.

Set aside what you learned using Borlands IDE, VC++ is what I and some think
the next stage in the evolution of product development. What I mean
is you can spend more time writing (or teaching) an application, than 
writing Windows code.
With Borland you have to learn the Windows coding up front. With VC++
you do not, it can be quite simply a fill in the blanks learning experence.
With VC++ you take on the learning of Windows one step or area at a time, not
all in your face at once.