NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/alt/msdos/programm/2983

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-21 | 1.6 KB

Xref: sparky alt.msdos.programmer:2983 comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.tools:1782 comp.os.msdos.programmer:11551 comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer:661
Newsgroups: alt.msdos.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.tools,comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer,comp.windows.ms.programmer
Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!sun4nl!relay.philips.nl!prle!martens
From: [e-mail] (martens p)
Subject: Re: Borland C++ 3.1 vs Microsoft C/C++ 7.0
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Organization: Philips Research Laboratories, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
References: <richard.723974524@dutepp6> <[e-mail]> <richard.724767664@dutepp13>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 14:51:48 GMT
Lines: 25

In article <richard.724767664@dutepp13> [e-mail] (Richard Kooijman) writes:
>I admit we don't have 6.01 or 6.0A but Microsoft Netherlands wants you
>to specifically point out where the bugs are in the compiler
>otherwise you don't get a update. Go figure, that isn't our job!
>We paid for a compiler but get something with bugs WE have to find!

I have found the Microsoft people in the Netherlands to be *very* helpful
and knowledgable. I have received minor updates, technical notes and
even reprints of useful articles from them, all for free. Maybe you have
an attitude problem?

>You work with Microsoft, can't you provide us with a C 6.01?

I sure hope Keith has something better to do.

>
>We will would 'like' to settle with that until Borland comes out
>with another fine product.

And deal with Borland support?



Peter