🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan21.175238.23743@cbfsb.cb.att.com> kkuehl@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (Kevin Kuehl) writes:
>
>Could someone please explain to me the difference between Turbo C++ and
>Borland C++?  I see there is about a $200 price difference and wonder
>what I get for the extra $200.  Also, do you thing the extra $200 is worth
>is for non-production programming?  I will be using is mostly just to
>write small programs to keep my skills sharp and try new things.

From what I know, the current differences between the Turbo C++ and the
Borland C++ lines are in the following areas: 

	Code Generation (BC++ will generate 386 instructions, at an option
		to help speed up far address use, for example)
	Optimization (I'm pretty sure the optimizer in the current product
		levels is a little better in BC++ than TC++)
	Debugger (BC++ comes with Turbo Debugger/Turbo Assembler combo --
		a very powerful professional debugger)
	Assembler (as in above)

You will notice that as BC++ grows, TC++ get the hand-me-down options and 
strengths...since I've been a BC++ owner for so long, I haven't looked at TC++
in a while.  

Oh...you could save a little more money, too, by purchasing a DOS only version
of TC++ (I'm pretty sure they still exist -- maybe in an earlier rev #)
if you're not interested in Windows.

To answer your question -- stick with TC++.  If you need to add better 
debugging later, you can add the Turbo Debugger/Turbo Assembler on later.

Jeff
	

-- 
--------------------------------------
jurlwin@gandalf.umcs.maine.edu