[JackOfAllTrades]

And this is why it's UTTERLY STUPID that your school is making you use a 20-YEAR-OLD COMPILER to do your work.

[aresh]

Jim, by that I mean that it does not even remotely provide the functionality of std::string.

And well, if you have no idea how to implement a string class, don't try it. It won't be easy.



@Jack, the school is not at fault. It is the central board of education

This post has been edited by aresh: 04 October 2012 - 08:55 AM

[booleanbalaji]

instead of ey it should be ofstream

Yeah okay.

[jimblumberg]

aresh, on 04 October 2012 - 10:54 AM, said:

Jim, by that I mean that it does not even remotely provide the functionality of std::string.

If you have the Borland documentation you can quite easily use their string class. But without this documentation trying to use this class is problematic.

But if the OP insists on using the Borland string class I would say they will probably get very conflicting advice. This is because of the stark differences between the Borland string class and the std::string class.

I don't recommend using the std::string class with the Borland compiler. But then I don't recommend using the Borland compiler, so????


Jim

[Skydiver]

aresh, on 04 October 2012 - 08:54 AM, said:

@Jack, the school is not at fault. It is the central board of education

Is it really the board? Or it just teachers plagiarizing other teachers' lesson plans? (Apparently it's okay for teachers to plagiarize (as long as they don't publish), but students aren't allowed to plagiarize?)

Looking at this (2010) syllabus CBSE Board Syllabus Computer Science Class XI-XII (2010), there is only one mention of Turbo C++ in the entire document, and it's in the suggested books portion of the syllabus.

The 2011 Syllabus is not much different.

Additionally, I've seen students claim that their professors taught them to use clrscr() and gotoxy(), yet these functions are not in the curriculum. To me that points heavily to there just being one lesson plan being passed around.

This post has been edited by Skydiver: 04 October 2012 - 09:34 AM

[aresh]

Let me tell you what. In my school, from day 1, I have been pestering my teacher to adopt Turbo C++. However, it has not yet been done. On the other hand, me and my teacher often talk about newer things like C++11 or something. So, although he knows about these things, he is forced to each us TC++, the reason being that it's the prescribed compiler by CBSE.


Also, the book used by schools - and I know that although it is not written on that page, it is somewhat like the official book - also uses TC++, writes void main() and has very bad programs.



If you are still not convinced, feel free to day say. I will have to write an extremely long past for that