> ... > Therefore, I think that tying someone to using VC++ is a very, very bad > idea. Microsoft has a very personal view of how a language should be used, > and what features it should provide. And sometimes this view doesn't match > the standard. This is the thing I don't like, having to maintain code which > compiles and run on several platforms. Maybe VC++ is not the best compiler in the world (I will not argue this point) but it is definetly the most used on the Windows platform and therefore I think it is a very good choice. I am happy with the CDK being supported only on VC++, please do not change this. (this should start another flame war..) Anyway, I cant see a conduit reaching the 100,000 lines of code so is it that bad to put up with for a couple thousand lines? Chris This message sent using EMUmail. http://EmuMail.com
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Roger Chaplin
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Bryon Lape
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Bryon Lape
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Jean Cyr
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Jason Dawes
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Dave Lippincott
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Jean Cyr
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Ade Barkah
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Bryon Lape
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Florent Pillet
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Christian Vandendorpe
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Chris Antos
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Aaron Ardiri
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Ade Barkah
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Michael Yam
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Chris Antos
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Alan Kennington
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Jean Cyr
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Bryon Lape
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Jean Cyr
- Re: Visual C++ 6.0 and CDK 3.0 Florent Pillet
