Visual Studio is not really comparable to C++ Builder.
Yes they are both C++ compilers but:
- Visual Studio is only RAD when using .NET languages
- MFC is ‘semi-rad’ but does not come close to ease of use of VCL
- Visual Studio compiler is better at producing optimized code, but C++ Builder uses Clang which is pretty good
- Visual Studio and C++Builder are both standards compliant (CB using Clang-based compilers)
- C++ Builder comes with Boost
- C++ Builder XE is much better than previous versions (not including Builder C++ 6.0)
- You can’t beat the RAD tools in C++ Builder for C++ development, nothing comes close
The differences in compilers probably won’t hurt you too much for non VCL dependent code. I have a DLL that I compile for clients under VC6, VS2008 and Builder 2010/XE. I have had to toss in a few #ifdefs, but most of them are actually for VC6.
The biggest recommendation I can make is DO NOT MOVE TO MFC, thats where the pain starts.
Think about the training for developers as well. Your developers will become significantly slower at producing working code while learning the idiosyncrasies of a new compiler.
With all that said, when I was given a choice for a client between moving to VS2008/2010 or Builder C++ for a new product, I picked Builder, just for the RAD IDE.
Good luck.
Updated for C++Builder 10.2 (2017):
- 32 bit and 64 bit Windows both use Clang/LLVM (as do iOS and Android)
- 32 bit and 64 bit Windows both use Boost 1.55
- 10.2 is very stable, getting better every release
This still comes up on Google searches, so updated again for Berlin 10.1:
- 32 bit and 64 bit code now uses CLANG/LLVM for Windows
- 32 bit code for OS X still uses old compiler
- Android and iOS compiles use CLANG/LLVM