Unless this task would make you exceedingly happy, I wouldn't bother.
IMO, there are much higher priority things requiring tuits than trying
to add a fourth compiler for windows, especially before the 1.0
release.
Regards.
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Andrew Whitworth <wknight8...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Ron Blaschke <r...@rblasch.org> wrote:
>> Some time ago, because of this ticket, I tried with Borland C++ 5.5.1
>> and 5.82, and failed miserably. But that may just be my bad bcc-foo.
>> Unless someone's keen for this platform and has access to a fairly new
>> ("within two years") version (is it called C++ Builder now?), I'm not
>> sure if this is worth pursuing.
>
> The free version of "Turbo C++ Builder" is called "Turbo C++
> Explorer". Should be the same thing, minus some features. If I can get
> it to work with the most recent version of that, I can try digging
> back through older versions to find compatibility problems.
>
> --Andre Whitworth
>
--
Will "Coke" Coleda
