 |
BorlandTalk.com
Borland discussion newsgroups
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Randall Parker
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 5:01 am Post subject: Your BCB 2006 experiences? |
 |
|
Okay, some of you have it. What do you think? Does it work better in obvious ways?
Does it work in buiding your large projects?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leroy Casterline
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 7:34 am Post subject: Re: Your BCB 2006 experiences? |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 21:01:44 -0800, Randall Parker
<STOPtechiepundit (AT) EVILfuturePOXpunditSPAM (DOT) com> wrote:
| Quote: | Okay, some of you have it. What do you think? Does it work better in obvious ways?
Does it work in buiding your large projects?
|
I can't speak to what folks here would consider a large project, but I
think it's great. Well worth the price of admission.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrue Cope [TeamB]
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 8:33 am Post subject: Re: Your BCB 2006 experiences? |
|
|
Randall Parker wrote:
| Quote: | Okay, some of you have it. What do you think? Does it work better in
obvious ways? Does it work in buiding your large projects?
|
I used it earlier this month to upgrade the core of our runtime library
from using DWORDs to address device blocks to QWORDs. The changes
extended into our file I/O classes and out to the API. Out of 287 units
I changed 187. I didn't have one AV and I loved the way I could use 'Go
to declaration' without worrying about opening the same file in two
different edit buffers at the same time.
Sadly for me it doesn't compile as quickly as BCB6 with the new speed
package but it was an improvement on the old BCB6. It gets the thumbs
up from me and my advice to any Builder user is 'buy it' :)
--
Andrue Cope [TeamB]
[Bicester, Uk]
http://info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pete Fraser
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 9:05 am Post subject: Re: Your BCB 2006 experiences? |
|
|
It's excellent, I love Live Templates and code folding is useful.
There is a bug with include paths when doing wacky things
but it's not major for normal use.
Well worth having, I love it.
HTH Pete
"Randall Parker" <STOPtechiepundit (AT) EVILfuturePOXpunditSPAM (DOT) com> wrote in
message news:43ab8456$1 (AT) newsgroups (DOT) borland.com...
| Quote: | Okay, some of you have it. What do you think? Does it work better in
obvious ways? Does it work in buiding your large projects?
|
|
|
| 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
