>I wonder why, doing Windows programming with OWL in 1993 was quite delightful, For me, it's because memories are not trustworthy (rose-colored glasses). Also,

>I wonder why, doing Windows programming with OWL in 1993 was quite delightful, For me, it's because memories are not trustworthy (rose-colored glasses). Also, I had less experience back then. And we as an industry didn't know any better. I got started in programming in Borland Pascal and Borland C++. Because of nostalgy, I've tried using them for fun again ten years ago and boy is there a reason I stopped using them in the first place. Sheesh. Example OWL snippets: for (int index = 0; index < count-1; index++) { int len = GetStringLen(index); TAPointer<tchar> buf(new tchar[len+1]); GetString((tchar*)buf, index); *outStream << (tchar*)buf << _T('\n'); //delete buf; } ... TClipboard cb(*this, false); if (cb.EmptyClipboard()) { int len = GetStringLen(index); HANDLE cbhdl = ::GlobalAlloc(GHND,len+1); LPTSTR buf = (LPTSTR)::GlobalLock(cbhdl); GetString(buf, index); ::GlobalUnlock(cbhdl); ... class tGastValid : public TEdit { public: tGastValid(TWindow *Win, short ID) : TEdit(Win, ID) {} void EvKillFocus(HWND); DECLARE_RESPONSE_TABLE(tGastValid); }; DEFINE_RESPONSE_TABLE1(tGastValid, TEdit) EV_WM_KILLFOCUS, END_RESPONSE_TABLE; void tGastValid::EvKillFocus(HWND hWnd) { GetParentO()->SendMessage(WM_COMMAND, DB_BTGAST, 0); TEdit::EvKillFocus(hWnd); } ^-- I liked THAT? What was wrong with me ;) That said, Borland had really good class libraries. If I had those libraries in a modern language, hey that wouldn't be so bad. But these languages? No, thank you.