🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <HOLLEN.91Jan8092846@fridge.megatek> hollen@megatek (Dion Hollenbeck) writes:
>In article <350bahrd@yoda.byu.edu> bahrd@yoda.byu.edu writes:
>> 
>> I was wondering what the difference between TurboC 2.0 and 
>> TurboC++ 1.0 in the
>> standard C mode was?  Is there any portability porblems if I write code in
>> TurboC++ using standard C conventions and then giving the code 
>> to a friend who has Turbo C 2.0?  Please let me know!!!
>
>Unfortunately I do not know specifics, but I just talked to Borland
>Customer Service about upgrading from TC to TC++ and one question
>that I asked was "Will my C programs just compile without change?"
>and they informed me that I would have to PORT them.

   I have recompiled a fair amount of code from TC 2.0 to TC++ 1.0. The
only difference I have found so far is that they reversed the polarity of
the return from feof()! This is documented in the manuals, too. Since I
don't have them in front of me, I don't remember which did which, but in
the TC 2.0 manual it clearly states the feof() returns zero for one
condition and nonzero for the other, and in the TC++ 1.0 manual it equally
clearly states the opposite.
   As I said, this is the only difference I have found so far. Your mileage
may vary, since the code I was recompiling was intended to be very portable
to begin with. Hence, it does not use esoteric features, which may well
have changed.

-- 
James W. Birdsall   WORK: jwbirdsa@amc.com   {uunet,uw-coco}!amc-gw!jwbirdsa
HOME: {uunet,uw-coco}!amc-gw!picarefy!jwbirdsa OTHER: 71261.1731@compuserve.com
"The OS shouldn't die every time the controller drools on a sector." -- a sysop
=========== "For it is the doom of men that they forget." -- Merlin ===========