🚀 go-pugleaf

"John A. Grant" <jazrant@zsc.nrcan.zc.ca> wrote:

>So what's the prognosis for BC++ 5.02?  All I want is a good
>Win32 API C++ development system - I don't want Delphi,
>Builder, OWL or VCL or any of that stuff. Just the straight Win32
>API. I've been led to believe that Builder isn't a complete a
>development system as BC++ 5.02, so I've stayed with BC++
>5.02

IMHO the only sensible thing to do with BC++ 5.02 is to leave it
behind ASAP. Not only will you continue to have issues with such API
headers but if you try to write *standard* C++ you'll end up being
very unhappy indeed.

I have also found the 5.02 compiler to be quite buggy (e.g. I can all
too easily produce code that upon throwing an exception will attempt
to execute a destructor for a local object [especially a string
object] that [due to the execution path] had never actually been
constructed [result == GPF]).

I think that C++ Builder [version 4 patch 2 at least] is a reliable
and (quite reasonably) standard conforming compiler. If you're worried
about RC file editing then you might wish to continue to use 5.02
simply for the resource files (I have actually got used to editing RC
files as text after getting sick of the 5.02 resource editor ripping
out important comments and conditional pre-processor macros :).


Regards,

Ian Knowles (remove the .nospam to reply)