installing c++ on my laptop
Not able to install Borland C++ 5.02 on my laptop.
It is showing messages like
1. Attempting to copy a file that is open in memory: "C:/BC5/BCUNREG.PAK".File will be installed in delayed mode.
2. Unable to open destination file C:/BC5/regsrvr.exe for writing.
It is showing messages like
1. Attempting to copy a file that is open in memory: "C:/BC5/BCUNREG.PAK".File will be installed in delayed mode.
2. Unable to open destination file C:/BC5/regsrvr.exe for writing.
Try something a bit more up-to-date, if you have the room.
Something like Code::Blocks if you want an IDE. http://www.codeblocks.org/
Or one of the various dialects of command-line compilers. Try a "distro" that includes the essentials with some useful libraries and extra utilities. One distro that I've found useful, it's a MinGW distro: https://nuwen.net/mingw.html
A more modern command-line compiler shouldn't take up a lot of HD space, though it will be larger than BCPP.
On my Win10 machine Code::Blocks uses about 275MB of space, the distro I recommended about 780MB. The distro has more useful utility stuff IMO than the default-with-compiler Code::Blocks
Something like Code::Blocks if you want an IDE. http://www.codeblocks.org/
Or one of the various dialects of command-line compilers. Try a "distro" that includes the essentials with some useful libraries and extra utilities. One distro that I've found useful, it's a MinGW distro: https://nuwen.net/mingw.html
A more modern command-line compiler shouldn't take up a lot of HD space, though it will be larger than BCPP.
On my Win10 machine Code::Blocks uses about 275MB of space, the distro I recommended about 780MB. The distro has more useful utility stuff IMO than the default-with-compiler Code::Blocks
To add to the words above, Borland C++ 5.02 is from 1997.
1997.
That's 22 years ago. Unless you're running MS-DOS or Windows NT 4, and for a really good reason, installing Borland 5.02 is a really bad idea. Even if you get it working, you can only use it to code in the C++ variant supported at the time. You'd be learning C++ from the year 1997. Which is another really bad idea.
The messages you're seeing are complaints that what you're trying to install it on isn't an operating system from 22 years ago.
1997.
That's 22 years ago. Unless you're running MS-DOS or Windows NT 4, and for a really good reason, installing Borland 5.02 is a really bad idea. Even if you get it working, you can only use it to code in the C++ variant supported at the time. You'd be learning C++ from the year 1997. Which is another really bad idea.
The messages you're seeing are complaints that what you're trying to install it on isn't an operating system from 22 years ago.
| You'd be learning C++ from the year 1997. |
I've tried Borland's pre-standard C++ dialect from 1997. It is as non-standard as anything Microsoft has done.
Choose one of the compilers bellow if you want good compiler:
1. msvc
2. gcc
3. llvm
and then if you have multiple OS's use VS Code as code editor or use one of the following according to your OS.
1. Windows: Visual Studio
2. Other: Eclipse or Code::Blocks
Forget about Borland C++ it's compiler from time before Jesus.
1. msvc
2. gcc
3. llvm
and then if you have multiple OS's use VS Code as code editor or use one of the following according to your OS.
1. Windows: Visual Studio
2. Other: Eclipse or Code::Blocks
Forget about Borland C++ it's compiler from time before Jesus.
One "problem" with Visual Studio, the full featured IDE from MS, is the C++ components are not installed on a default installation, they have to be added.
And VS is a HD space hog. VS needs gigabytes of storage (over 10GB on my system [maybe more, there are bits and pieces thrown around on 2 HDs]), even for a "stripped down install" that includes the optional C++ packages.
Nothing against VS as an IDE, it really does a good job, except how HD space hungry it is.
And VS is a HD space hog. VS needs gigabytes of storage (over 10GB on my system [maybe more, there are bits and pieces thrown around on 2 HDs]), even for a "stripped down install" that includes the optional C++ packages.
Nothing against VS as an IDE, it really does a good job, except how HD space hungry it is.
The OP is in India, so no real surprise why he is trying to install Borland C++.
It would help if the OP told us what his laptop OS is, and maybe how much free HD space he has. We could offer compiler suggestions more suited to that.
It would help if the OP told us what his laptop OS is, and maybe how much free HD space he has. We could offer compiler suggestions more suited to that.
I like Cygwin's c++ which will pull in most of the unix tools like grep along with it. You can tie several editors to use it to compile or just go command line. You don't need all of Cygwin, you can pick what parts it adds. It can get big if you get it all.
Or visual studio is good, but its a bit overkill for simple work. Built in debugger is the biggest thing I miss when going command line instead.
I can't say enough bad things about eclipse. Starting with the excessively slow launch and general performance.
Or visual studio is good, but its a bit overkill for simple work. Built in debugger is the biggest thing I miss when going command line instead.
I can't say enough bad things about eclipse. Starting with the excessively slow launch and general performance.
Last edited on
Furry Guy wrote:
I only use VS for last 8 years and never encountered this issue, maybe I miss your point but VS installation can be "minimal", I mean you can install only C++ related libraries and the winapi is default installed ofc.
the rest, such as MFC is installed with "VS installer" as separate components, the only thing I dislike is that NET framework (which I call crapload, is installed without your consent).
as for HD hungry, hm yes it is, but 10GB or even 20GB isn't really that much in 2019 when hard disk and even SSD's are pretty cheap computer components.
what should gamers say with 10 or more games installed and each takes 20GB?
Hm, I dont understand, did their government ban some IDE's or compilers just currious :)
jonnin wrote
I like to use combination of gcc + MSYS2 + mingw + VS code to see how my code compiles with gcc.
it feels great to have unix tools on windows with windows style look.
| One "problem" with Visual Studio, is the C++ components are not installed on a default installation, they have to be added. |
I only use VS for last 8 years and never encountered this issue, maybe I miss your point but VS installation can be "minimal", I mean you can install only C++ related libraries and the winapi is default installed ofc.
the rest, such as MFC is installed with "VS installer" as separate components, the only thing I dislike is that NET framework (which I call crapload, is installed without your consent).
as for HD hungry, hm yes it is, but 10GB or even 20GB isn't really that much in 2019 when hard disk and even SSD's are pretty cheap computer components.
what should gamers say with 10 or more games installed and each takes 20GB?
| The OP is in India, so no real surprise why he is trying to install Borland C++. |
Hm, I dont understand, did their government ban some IDE's or compilers just currious :)
jonnin wrote
| I like Cygwin's c++ which will pull in most of the unix tools like grep along with it. |
I like to use combination of gcc + MSYS2 + mingw + VS code to see how my code compiles with gcc.
it feels great to have unix tools on windows with windows style look.
Last edited on
Nothing WRONG, per se, with trying to install Borland C++ other than it is decades outdated.
The school system in India seems to make it a requirement to deal with the antiquated piece of shit instead of more modern tools.
The point is when doing a fresh install of a recent VS version -- 2015 to 2019 -- a default install doesn't select the C++ packages automatically. They have to be manually selected.
Yes, the install can be modified later to add them, so really it is more a minor annoyance than a major "bug." But it is something those installing VS for the first time need to be aware of.
Especially for someone on a low bandwidth or limited time internet connection who does a web-based install.
The crap that does get installed on a default, first time, install is really a PITA.
That presumes the OP has a relatively modern laptop. Maybe yes, maybe no.
My space estimate was just that. An estimate of dozens of folders strewn across 2 HDs, with hundreds of files. I very easily could have missed a lot of files/folders.
What if the OP does have the space, yet is not running Windows 7 or later? No go, VS isn't supported on older Win versions.
The school system in India seems to make it a requirement to deal with the antiquated piece of shit instead of more modern tools.
| I only use VS for last 8 years and never encountered this issue, maybe I miss your point |
The point is when doing a fresh install of a recent VS version -- 2015 to 2019 -- a default install doesn't select the C++ packages automatically. They have to be manually selected.
Yes, the install can be modified later to add them, so really it is more a minor annoyance than a major "bug." But it is something those installing VS for the first time need to be aware of.
Especially for someone on a low bandwidth or limited time internet connection who does a web-based install.
The crap that does get installed on a default, first time, install is really a PITA.
| 10GB or even 20GB isn't really that much in 2019 |
That presumes the OP has a relatively modern laptop. Maybe yes, maybe no.
My space estimate was just that. An estimate of dozens of folders strewn across 2 HDs, with hundreds of files. I very easily could have missed a lot of files/folders.
What if the OP does have the space, yet is not running Windows 7 or later? No go, VS isn't supported on older Win versions.
Last edited on
| Hm, I dont understand, did their government ban some IDE's or compilers just currious :) |
It seems that the national curriculum there requires that Borland/Turbo C++ be used for learning C++.
There's nothing students or their teachers can do about this - it's imposed upon them from above. There's little point telling students to use something more modern - this is a requirement placed upon them by schools who, in turn, have this requirement placed upon them by, ultimately, the government.
(This doesn't stop people here derailing thread after thread with rants about it, despite the fact that the poor student whose thread they are derailing just came here to get some help with their C++ code.)
| have this requirement placed upon them by, ultimately, the government. |
Ok now.., I find this hard to believe without knowing why would the government (or school) require use of outdated software?
especially for learning C++ which is constantly evolving every few years?
I would understand ban of microsoft programs or closed source software by crazy regimes, but what's wrong with gcc for them? it's open source and very modern compiler.
Presumably, because whoever is in charge of the national curriculum in India doesn't want to spend the time and money it would cost to update everything.
Understand this: even here in a wealthy country like the UK, most schools have minimal resources for IT. In most schools, the person in charge of IT is a regular teacher who doesn't know much more about computers than anyone else on the staff. That regular teacher is most likely already overworked and underpaid, and and additional burden that's placed on them like, say, installing new compilers, will most likely eat into time that needs to be spent on preparing lessons, or marking homework, or doing any one of the thousand other tasks that teachers are expected to perform in their own time, outside of school hours.
And of course, the teachers then have to learn to use the new software. And support it - remember, every minute spent in a classroom having to figure out some problem that's arisen due to trying to use new, unfamiliar tools, is a minute that students aren't being taught the things the school is required to teach them.
At the governmental level, similarly, the people fixing the national curriculum will most likely not be experts in C++, or any other programming language. At some point in the past, when fixing the curriculum, they will have taken some advice from people who do know about this stuff (or, rather, whom the civil servants believe know about this stuff, which is not always the same thing). They will have had to consider the costs of whatever is proposed, and then had to balance up how to pay for that alongside all the other things that have to come out of the education budget - a budget that, ultimately, they have to justify making taxpayers pay for.
And once the curriculum is set, it will stay that way, until someone sufficiently high up the chain of command - ultimately, a minister for education, is convinced that it is worth spending the time and money mon revisiting the curriculum, going through the whole process of paying people to determine some new proposal, and costing that proposal. They then have to decide whether the benefits of implementing this change outweight the financial costs of doing it - costs that will take money away from all the other things that have to come out of the education budget, such as maintaining facilities, or paying for textbooks, or recruiting more teachers.
I can't imagine these things are any easier in countries where resources are more scarce than they are here.
It would be lovely if every 3 years, the IT fairy waved her magic wand and upgraded every school's software to use the newest compilers supporting the newest C++ features, and magically implanted the knowledge of how to use those, and how to teach students how to use then. But this is the real world, and the IT fairy seems to be absent.
(In case you're wondering, I've worked in the education sector. I've been into schools, and installed their software, and maintained their equipment, and talked to teachers. I know what I'm talking about.)
Understand this: even here in a wealthy country like the UK, most schools have minimal resources for IT. In most schools, the person in charge of IT is a regular teacher who doesn't know much more about computers than anyone else on the staff. That regular teacher is most likely already overworked and underpaid, and and additional burden that's placed on them like, say, installing new compilers, will most likely eat into time that needs to be spent on preparing lessons, or marking homework, or doing any one of the thousand other tasks that teachers are expected to perform in their own time, outside of school hours.
And of course, the teachers then have to learn to use the new software. And support it - remember, every minute spent in a classroom having to figure out some problem that's arisen due to trying to use new, unfamiliar tools, is a minute that students aren't being taught the things the school is required to teach them.
At the governmental level, similarly, the people fixing the national curriculum will most likely not be experts in C++, or any other programming language. At some point in the past, when fixing the curriculum, they will have taken some advice from people who do know about this stuff (or, rather, whom the civil servants believe know about this stuff, which is not always the same thing). They will have had to consider the costs of whatever is proposed, and then had to balance up how to pay for that alongside all the other things that have to come out of the education budget - a budget that, ultimately, they have to justify making taxpayers pay for.
And once the curriculum is set, it will stay that way, until someone sufficiently high up the chain of command - ultimately, a minister for education, is convinced that it is worth spending the time and money mon revisiting the curriculum, going through the whole process of paying people to determine some new proposal, and costing that proposal. They then have to decide whether the benefits of implementing this change outweight the financial costs of doing it - costs that will take money away from all the other things that have to come out of the education budget, such as maintaining facilities, or paying for textbooks, or recruiting more teachers.
I can't imagine these things are any easier in countries where resources are more scarce than they are here.
It would be lovely if every 3 years, the IT fairy waved her magic wand and upgraded every school's software to use the newest compilers supporting the newest C++ features, and magically implanted the knowledge of how to use those, and how to teach students how to use then. But this is the real world, and the IT fairy seems to be absent.
(In case you're wondering, I've worked in the education sector. I've been into schools, and installed their software, and maintained their equipment, and talked to teachers. I know what I'm talking about.)
ok, thank you a lot for detailed description! I see now.
it's indeed very sad that so little is invested into science and education.
Obviously as you said you know how teachers feel.
btw my hobby is astronomy (like to learn how space works) and my dream is that one day governments around the world start investing at least 5% of their GDP into common space exploration and space travel. (it's not that much since around 10% goes for military)
now imagine what achievements could there be with such investments :)
btw, UK had one great scientist Stephen Hawking, congratulations that guy had very good vision, I still often listen to his videos.
it's indeed very sad that so little is invested into science and education.
Obviously as you said you know how teachers feel.
btw my hobby is astronomy (like to learn how space works) and my dream is that one day governments around the world start investing at least 5% of their GDP into common space exploration and space travel. (it's not that much since around 10% goes for military)
now imagine what achievements could there be with such investments :)
btw, UK had one great scientist Stephen Hawking, congratulations that guy had very good vision, I still often listen to his videos.
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.