Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: rbowman Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 Date: 16 Feb 2025 04:51:24 GMT Lines: 28 Message-ID: References: <20250212081704.00003ce1@gmail.com> <20250212145430.00001040@gmail.com> <6fqdnVeJects6jD6nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <20250213080300.00001d26@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net GEOTKf0F80kcWdkCdGuxggYaIycxVZZTdxE6dmv1SKjMFivZ5y Cancel-Lock: sha1:zQPFQD1s9gBBuOpvHrDfczuKriE= sha256:GStZCwBMT7KzfRaFu3uFjDy+QhpaIE2/oCkYD8jlzJc= User-Agent: Pan/0.160 (Toresk; ) Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:65570 comp.os.linux.advocacy:686017 On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 22:51:03 -0500, Joel wrote: > rbowman wrote: >>On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 21:35:16 -0500, c186282 wrote: >> >>> The Borland products were GREAT STUFF from TP v1.0, >>> a whole different experience, a whole new level of productivity. >> >>I preferred OWL to Mighty Fucking Complicated but so it goes. > > > I had Borland's Win95-era package, certainly was great in its time, > but ultimately it seems reasonable for M$ to provide development > software themselves, they're the ones creating the platform. I've still got the box for Windows 3. Borland's C++ preceeded Microsoft's C/C++ 7.0. MFC was a very thin wrapper on the C API. To Microsoft's defense C++ wasn't ready for prime time in the early '90s and Microsoft had to invent their own conventions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_API That does a good job of airing the dirty laundry. I don't know about Petzold's later in the series but his 'Programming Windows' books used C and direct API calls. In the 6th edition he used C# and stated Microsoft had finally come up with a decent language.