Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #8176 > unrolled thread

Visual Studio is not really comparable to C++ Builder.

Back to article view | Back to comp.programming

Contents

  Visual Studio is not really comparable to C++ Builder. Intelli2 <intelli2@mama.com> - 2017-12-06 17:03 -0500
    Re: Visual Studio is not really comparable to C++ Builder. "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2017-12-07 22:39 +0800
    Re: Visual Studio is not really comparable to C++ Builder. Inigo joseph <inigojoseph89@gmail.com> - 2018-01-23 02:23 -0800

#8176 — Visual Studio is not really comparable to C++ Builder.

Hello,

Read this:

==

Visual Studio is not really comparable to C++ Builder.

Yes they are both C++ compilers but:

1- Visual Studio is only RAD when using .NET languages
2- MFC is 'semi-rad' but does not come close to ease of use of VCL
3- Visual Studio compiler is better at producing optimized code, but C++ 
Builder uses Clang which is pretty good
4- Visual Studio and C++Builder are both standards compliant (CB using 
Clang-based compilers)
5- C++ Builder comes with Boost
6- C++ Builder XE is much better than previous versions (not including 
Builder C++ 6.0)
7- You can't beat the RAD tools in C++ Builder for C++ development, 
nothing comes close

The biggest recommendation I can make is DO NOT MOVE TO MFC, that's 
where the pain starts.


With all that said, when I was given a choice for a client between 
moving to VS2008/2010 or Builder C++ for a new product, I picked 
Builder, just for the RAD IDE.

==


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#8183

Sir, calm down... calm down! Sleep more! :)

On 12/7/2017 6:03 AM, Intelli2 wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Read this:
>
> ==
>
> Visual Studio is not really comparable to C++ Builder.
>
> Yes they are both C++ compilers but:
>
> 1- Visual Studio is only RAD when using .NET languages
> 2- MFC is 'semi-rad' but does not come close to ease of use of VCL
> 3- Visual Studio compiler is better at producing optimized code, but C++
> Builder uses Clang which is pretty good
> 4- Visual Studio and C++Builder are both standards compliant (CB using
> Clang-based compilers)
> 5- C++ Builder comes with Boost
> 6- C++ Builder XE is much better than previous versions (not including
> Builder C++ 6.0)
> 7- You can't beat the RAD tools in C++ Builder for C++ development,
> nothing comes close
>
> The biggest recommendation I can make is DO NOT MOVE TO MFC, that's
> where the pain starts.
>
>
> With all that said, when I was given a choice for a client between
> moving to VS2008/2010 or Builder C++ for a new product, I picked
> Builder, just for the RAD IDE.
>
> ==
>
>
> Thank you,
> Amine Moulay Ramdane.


-- 
   @~@   Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
  / v \  Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
   ^ ^   (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10)  Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8325

 Visual Studio is not really comparable to C++ Builder. Yes they are both C++ compilers but: Visual Studio is only RAD when using .NET languages. https://www.besanttechnologies.com/training-courses/data-warehousing-training/r-programming-training-in-chennai

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.programming

csiph-web