Linked by twitterfire on Mon 24th Oct 2011 22:52 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 494332
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/16/13 9:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/15/13 22:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/14/13 18:22 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-05-09
I tend to disagree with that; comparing Visual Studio 6.0 with Borland C++ Builder 6.0 made Borland tools better, easier to use and more standard compliant than MS ones.
Actually, Visual C++ 6.0 had a very poor standard compliance if compared with Borland's or GNU's compilers.
And though this is a very biased comment, I consider MFC and COM (both MS technologies) ultraoverengineered and megacomplicated comparing to other alternatives available such days.
Edited 2011-10-25 22:54 UTC