Lynn Allan wrote:
BCB6 Personal isn't reasonable for development purposes. Thepersonalversion can't be used for debugging, making it basically useless. Wetryto maintain the BCB6 projects so that people can compile projectsthathave already been developed and debugged and maybe for people whowantto submit patches for minor enhancements that wouldn't need a fulldebugger.
I don't have a great deal of experience with BCB6 Personal, except I found it more than adequate for development and debugging. People interested in learning about BibleCs (and possibly contributing as they get up to speed) need to be able to build a working, debuggable .exe that they can step around in and examine variables. This build-for-debug has been a non-trivial task for some time.
Okay.... (responding to Lynn's message since his was the most recent, but this is really in response to other messages as well).... The issue isn't "can you step through code?" or "is BCB6 personal useful for compiling?" or "is BCB6 personal free enough/open enough/available enough/...?". The issue is "is BCB6 personal sufficient for Troy's needs?" And, lacking codeguard and other advanced debugging features, I think the answer is no. If Troy wants to chime in to explain why we're still using BCB5 instead of BCB6, he can. Failing that, discussion of reasons for or against changing to BCB6 are pointless.
--Chris _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
