Quick Links
Categories
Links
Why shouldn't we use the Turbo C/C++(DOS) compilers?
Below are few major reasons for why you should avoid using Turbo C/C++ compilers for DOS:- It is over a decade old and do not conform to the current standards.
- Only 16bit DOS applications can be developed using that compiler.
- Maximum amount of memory available for programs is 64kb, while modern applications need a lot more than that.
- The compiler is buggy and do not issue proper diagnostic messages for erroneous programs.
- There are no database libraries supporting this compiler.
- There are no modern graphics libraries supporting this compiler.
- Its C++ compiler is pre-standard, and do not have STL library.
There are many new good compilers available for free such as GCC, VC++ and Dev C++(MinGW), they conform to the standards well and are very rich in features. There is also a new 32 bit Turbo C++ compiler called as Turbo C++ 2006 (Explorer edition), you can upgrade to this new compiler if you are used to the older Turbo C++ compilers.
Click here for links to download the new C/C++ compilers and IDEs.
CategoryCompilers
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 0.0560 seconds