Talk:Turbo C++

Latest comment: 6 years ago by Yamla in topic Program

Untitled edit

Please add a screenshot of Turbo C++ 2006.

The old screenshot may cause readers to instantly depart without realizing the current version offers a modern GUI.

I disagree with this anonymous request for two reasons:

  1. Turbo C++ is, franklopment tool of the early 90s than it is today.
  2. The historical screen shots are more important in showing the software in its prime, which many users may have never seen, don't have, or can't run - anyone who wants to can download and run the modern TC++.

Of course, I use Linux exclusively now and couldn't do a screen shot of TC++ if I wanted to. Scott1329m 12:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

I don't think there is a rule against multiple screenshots. Include both historical and current screens, with appropriate captions. VanishingUser 01:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Umm...was there really a "Turbo C++ 4.0"? I remember Turbo C++ 3.1 (Windows) and 4.5 (Windows), but I thought 4.0 was strictly a Borland C++ release. 12 March 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.14.141.69 (talk) 15:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC) happy lng naman ako sa pag ti2ngin d2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.201.117.102 (talk) 11:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Codeplex Version edit

Has https://turboc.codeplex.com/ this anything to do with Borland's version? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andwan0 (talkcontribs) 22:44, 29 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

This is a link to pirated software. Yes, it looks to be Turbo C++, but for obvious reasons, we can't include the link in the article. --Yamla (talk) 01:01, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Program edit

  1. include<iostream.h>
  2. include<conio.h>
  3. include<math.h>

Void main() { Clrscr(); Int a,b,c,d; Cout<<"enter the numbers"<<endl; Cin>>a>>b; C=a+b; Cout<<" the sum of these numbers is:"<<c<<endl; d=a*b; Cout<<"the product of these numbers is:"<<d<<endl; Getch(); } Ali hamza ah (talk) 15:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

This is not a valid C++ program, nor would it be an appropriate use of the talk page even if it was. --Yamla (talk) 15:31, 19 November 2017 (UTC)Reply