Subj : Re: version question. To : borland.public.cpp.borlandcpp From : Nathaniel L. Walker Date : Wed Jan 12 2005 07:14 pm "Kody Wu" wrote in message news:41e55f50@newsgroups.borland.com... > > I have searched the internet for a long time and couldn't get the answer. So, I post my questions here. > > 1. What's the difference between Turbo C++ 3.0 and Borland C++ 3.1? Turbo C++ came with functionality to produce DOS Real Mode applications. It included Class Libraries and BGI. Borland C++ 3.1 Included all that plus: - The ability to produce 16-bit DPMI applications via Pharlap's 286 DPMI Lite extender - Turbo Vision (DOS-App Framework) - Ability to produce 386 Instructions - Ability to produce Windows 3.0/1[1] applications - ObjectWindows for C++ - Turbo Assembler/Debugger/Profiler for DOS and Windows - MS Platform SDK for Win16 - A MUCH better DOS IDE - An OK Windows IDE (for Win16 development only) - Numerous Bug fixes and enhancements - Mucho Documentation (Borland was once King of documenting their products, seems not to be anymore) - A MUCH larger pricetag > 2. What's the newest IDE compiler that can run on windows and can compile DOS application to run on DOS platform? Borland C++ 5.02, 1997 The 16-bit linker will not work from the IDE under Windows XP (has this been fixed in SP2?), at least not for me. Neither will the Help compiler. Resource compiler is okay it seems. If you want to do DOS development, I'd probably look at OpenWatcom. It's a good compiler and about where BC5 is compliance-wise (and getting better since they started developing it again). It can target DOS and 32-Bit DOS protected mode. Turbo Vision has been ported to it, and wxWidgets works out of the box with it as a Win16/32 App Framework. The upside to Borland C++ is that it compiles much faster, and from the benchmarks that I've run the code is pretty good too in comparison. 32-Bit DPMI gives your app almost unlimited memory (relative to Real Mod apps), though. Nathaniel L. Walker > > Thanks > > Kody Wu > .