|MicroSoft C 6.0F firstname.lastname@example.org (1990-07-07)|
|Re: MicroSoft C 6.0F email@example.com (1990-07-14)|
|Re: MicroSoft C 6.0F firstname.lastname@example.org (1990-07-16)|
|Re: MicroSoft C 6.0F email@example.com (1990-07-18)|
|Re: MicroSoft C 6.0F firstname.lastname@example.org (1990-07-19)|
|Re: MicroSoft C 6.0F bnrgate!bwdls58.bnr.ca!mlord@uunet.UU.NET (1990-07-24)|
|From:||email@example.com (David Conrad)|
|Keywords:||C, reviews, BGI|
|Organization:||CAT-TALK Conferencing Network, Detroit, MI|
|References:||<firstname.lastname@example.org> <1990Jul07.email@example.com> <1990Jul14.firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||Wed, 18 Jul 90 22:58:48 GMT|
In article <1990Jul14.email@example.com> firstname.lastname@example.org (Andrew R Cook) writes:
}MicroSoft C6.0 has many nice features that C5.1 or C4.0 do not have, that
}make the upgrade worthwhile. First of all(and most important to me) it
}includes a whole bunch more in the way of graphics support. It now has a
}presentation graphics library that is good for producing graphs very
}painlessly. It is not as flexible as one would like, but is very satisfying
}none the less. As before, all graphics are supported in HGC, CGA, EGA, and
}some VGA modes. ...
Are you familiar with Borland's BGI (included with Turbo C2.0)? How do the
two compare? They sound very similar (Microsoft probably added this feature
because of its presence in Turbo C).
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.