Talk:Borland C++

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Hi,

Should the initial paragraph read:

... Although it can be used to program Windows applications, it does not include a stand alone Windows IDE. Windows applications must be edited, browsed, and compiled from within the DOS IDE.

I've only had limited experience with 3.1, but I understood that it only had the console-based IDE.

Regards,

Lee

Versions above 4.0 only has the Windows IDE. My undestanding is that the name "Borland C++" is associated with the Windows IDE and the former "Turbo C++" with the DOS IDE, but I'm not sure.

Rogerio

Borland C++ 3.1 included a Windows IDE, but it could only target Windows. You could target DOS as well as Windows from the MS-DOS IDE.

- Nate.

History

At the time Borland releasead C++ in the late 80's everyone was caught off guard because Borland had not indicated it was even working on the product. It was later noticed that a product called Zortech C++ disappeared at the same time. I remember an article that stated that Borland bought Zortech C++ and repackaged it.

65.12.121.188 11:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)H. Hall[reply]

Mistake?

Borland C++ 2.0 - (1990, MSDOS) // we have v2.0 here
Borland C++ 3.0 - (1991) New compiler support to build Microsoft Windows applications.
Borland C++ 3.1 - (1992) Introduction of Windows-based IDE and application frameworks (OWL 1.0, Turbovision 1.0)
Borland C++ 4.0 - (1993, Windows 3.x) MS-DOS IDE supported no longer included, OWL 2.0.
Borland C++ 2.0 - (1992, OS/2) // and again v2.0

RealKenny — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.180.67.4 (talk • contribs) 12:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's as clear as mud... Apparently the confusion is that the latter 2.0 version is just for OS/2. It seems (from the above) that they released OS/2 versions with their own version numbers, that is duplicating the numbers for their DOS products. As I don't have any of their original products, I can't verify what the packaging called it. Perhaps "Borland C++ OS/2 2.0"? That would have reduced the confusion. I don't want to put that here, as I have no proof that's what they did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.2.230 (talk) 17:40, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A successor to Turbo C++?

Borland C++ can't be the successor to Turbo C++, because both served different markets. Borland C++ was for the professional sector and Turbo C++ for home users and hobbyist. The same can be read in the article about Turbo C++. --IT-Compiler (talk) 22:35, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Additional informations about Borland C++

Additional informations about Borland C++ can be found in Borland's "Borland Open Architecture Handbook" which is available in the file "BC4BOA.ZIP" (MD5: a1df389450d16c436f27fd45f4b14eb6). You might find it on the Internet or some old CD-ROM collections. The book presents technical information about several of Borland's language tools. These are "internal functions", "implementation details", "file formats" and other technical specifications. Maybe it is usefull for the article or as source for further reading. --IT-Compiler (talk) 02:55, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]