Quick Links
Categories
Links
Revision [344]
This is an old revision of Avoid16bitTurboCppCompilers made by SharathAV on 2007-04-16 03:19:53.Why shouldn't we use the Turbo C/C++(DOS) compilers?
The Turbo C/C++(16 bit DOS) compilers are over a decade old and do not conform to the current standards well. Its features are poor and only contains libraries for programming in DOS environment. You would have to unlearn most of what you learnt with Turbo C/C++ because those old libraries are of no use in todays 32 and 64 bit computing environments. Many schools and colleges in India still instruct their students to use Turbo C/C++ because their staffs aren't competent enough to learn and teach the new compilers. Even many books written by Indian authors(like Yashwant Kanetkar) still teach using Turbo C/C++, such books should be avoided. There are newer compilers (which are free) such as GCC, VC++ and Dev C++(MinGW) which should be used instead. Also, there is a new 32 bit Turbo C++ compiler called as Turbo C++ Explorer, to which you can upgrade.Click here for links to download the new C/C++ compilers and IDEs.
Comments [Hide comments/form]
Although Turbo 'Blue' C may not be the best compiler for production systems, it remains the best compiler for learning to code, explore and rapid prototyping.
Its BGI library and graphics.h enabled lakhs, if not millions to explore Graphics. No other graphics system, not even OpenGL or X3D allows such speed in programming.
I may be getting emotional, but I am a Turbo fan, first and last.
Its BGI library and graphics.h enabled lakhs, if not millions to explore Graphics. No other graphics system, not even OpenGL or X3D allows such speed in programming.
I may be getting emotional, but I am a Turbo fan, first and last.
-- 220.225.42.205 (2008-11-28 10:23:35)
good this software
-- 117.98.58.136 (2009-06-24 13:29:03)
Learning to program with "Turbo 3.0" is a bit like digging the garden with a dessert spoon because nobody has shown you how to use a pitchfork; or they tried to show you how to use a pitchfork, and you balked at their idea that anything could possibly be 'better' for you without really spending the time to see what the fuss was about.
If and when you do get around to learning the /real/ C++ language, you'll be amazed at how much easier your learning process will become. If a school/college is forcing Turbo C++ down your throat, then they are doing you an enormous disservice by teaching you a language which will be close to useless for actually finding employment writing C++ code - essentially they're wasting your time, and they might aswell teach you Java or C# instead; at least people actually use those languages.
Yes, I mean that Turbo 3.0 does not actually support a language which can really be compared to C++ - its _that_ old. C++ went through revolutionary changes in 1998; it almost became a new language far more powerful and elegant than any of its predecessors. Turbo 3.0 predates these new changes by at least 5 years.
Turbo 3.0 is closer to C than to C++, except that it fails at teaching you C aswell, because it still uses some pre-standard C++ libraries which aren't part of C.
If and when you do get around to learning the /real/ C++ language, you'll be amazed at how much easier your learning process will become. If a school/college is forcing Turbo C++ down your throat, then they are doing you an enormous disservice by teaching you a language which will be close to useless for actually finding employment writing C++ code - essentially they're wasting your time, and they might aswell teach you Java or C# instead; at least people actually use those languages.
Yes, I mean that Turbo 3.0 does not actually support a language which can really be compared to C++ - its _that_ old. C++ went through revolutionary changes in 1998; it almost became a new language far more powerful and elegant than any of its predecessors. Turbo 3.0 predates these new changes by at least 5 years.
Turbo 3.0 is closer to C than to C++, except that it fails at teaching you C aswell, because it still uses some pre-standard C++ libraries which aren't part of C.
-- cpc2-staf1-0-0-cust562.sol2.cable.ntl.com (2010-01-16 11:39:10)
Page was generated in -0.6237 seconds