 |
BorlandTalk.com
Borland discussion newsgroups
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Alexandre César
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2005 11:27 pm Post subject: Dexter or NEXTER???? |
 |
|
Hi,
I hope that the next version of C++Builder gain real improves (more ANSI-ISO
C++ conformance for example) . I hope that Dexter is not more one bad tool
package like Kilix 3 Professional. I need one good C++ Builder, not one
Delphi or one (tsc tsc tsc) C#!!!!!
If "Dexter" be only more one "TOOL PACKAGE" then Borland have rename this to
"NEXTER" (Yes, only NEXT BIG package of BUG'S ) ....
PS:
I sale Kylix 3 Professional, anybody need this?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gustav Rosev
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:33 am Post subject: Re: Dexter or NEXTER???? |
|
|
You are > I hope that the next version of C++Builder gain real improves
(more ANSI-ISO
| Quote: | C++ conformance for example) . I hope that Dexter is not more one bad tool
package like Kilix 3 Professional. I need one good C++ Builder, not one
Delphi or one (tsc tsc tsc) C#!!!!!
If "Dexter" be only more one "TOOL PACKAGE" then Borland have rename this
to "NEXTER" (Yes, only NEXT BIG package of BUG'S ) ....
PS:
I sale Kylix 3 Professional, anybody need this?
|
Better ANSI compliance!, from Borland ? You must be very optimisti (or
joking).
Regarding your Kylix 3 Pro. Yes, I can accept it if you pay me more than the
garbage collection service rate in my municipality. Unfortunatelly Borland
did the same mistake many many times; Kylix 3 is yet another inmaturely
released product with absolutely no support. I'm really sorry for its
developers (techncal guys), they must feel very bad beacause of their
irresponsible marketing/management/decision making people.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrue Cope [TeamB]
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:58 am Post subject: Re: Dexter or NEXTER???? |
|
|
Gustav Rosev wrote:
| Quote: | Better ANSI compliance!, from Borland ? You must be very optimisti
(or joking).
|
Not really. At present there is a lot of room for improvement so adding
even one compiler fix would make compliance better. If the OP had been
asking for 100% compliance then that would be a lot less likely but I'm
sure the next version of the compiler will be better. It has to be if
only because it's going to be using Dinkumware STL and they have said
they are looking at Boost issues.
--
Andrue Cope [TeamB]
[Bicester, Uk]
http://info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
