|
|
ymuntyan@xxxxxxxxx said:
<snip>
> So indeed "serious enough" back then are again "hardly serious"
> now. Here's a quote: "If one needs the source to make the
> implementation conform, then that's a serious problem
> that effectively renders the game not worth the candle,
> and one would be better off seeking a better implementation."
> Guess whose words these were.
Mine. So what? Do you have a list of conformance issues, or not?
> You are a real Turbo C fan, just admit it :)
A bit, yes, and I don't mind admitting it. I don't *use* it terribly often,
but I did have cause to use it quite recently, and I found it very
comfortable indeed. I would have no hesitation whatsoever in using it to
teach C to someone who, for whatever reason, didn't have access to a
32-bit system, or perhaps someone who wanted to be able to do nice easy
graphics Real Fast and Real Simple.
<snip>
> Yep. Borland is a perfect company,
I disagree. For one thing, its Marketing Department should be fired, en
masse. Borland has always been hopeless at marketing.
> it makes perfect software.
Again, I must disagree with you. But I *will* agree that it makes pretty
good software.
<snip>
--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: - www">http://www. +rjh@
Google users: < www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php">http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
|
|