xe6 is running 2009 programme? [Edit]

Installed xe6 yesterday and finally managed to get it to build the c++ builder application I wrote using rad studio 2009. Everything was as before but when I changed some of the code nothing changed and when I set some breakpoints the programme wouldn't go into debug mode when it hit the breakpoints. It was running the 2009 programme unchanged.
I renamed the Debug and Debug_Build folders hoping it would recreate them with the updated application files. This it seemed to do (although it only created a new Debug folder) but when I tried running the application from within the IDE I got the message "Unable to create process: The system cannot find the file specified.". The only way I could get the revised app to run was by clicking the .exe file in the debug folder.
Where have I went wrong? I cannot recall doing anything different when I upgraded from c++ builder 6 to rad studio 2009. Maybe senility has set in.
Edited by: Tom Roberts on Jul 15, 2015 10:23 AM
0
Tom
7/15/2015 5:23:57 PM
📁 embarcadero.cppbuilder.install
📃 385 articles.
⭐ 0 followers.

💬 2 Replies
👁️‍🗨️ 798 Views


Tom Roberts wrote:
> Installed xe6 yesterday and finally managed to get it to build the
> c++ builder application I wrote using rad studio 2009
Was the project upgraded automatically? (Autoupgrade causes problems
with paths, libs, etc. more often than not.)
If so I advise you to create new project in XE, add needed files and
see if this helps.
--
Alex
0
Alex
7/16/2015 3:53:09 AM
> {quote:title=Alex Belo wrote:}{quote}
> Tom Roberts wrote:
> 
> > Installed xe6 yesterday and finally managed to get it to build the
> > c++ builder application I wrote using rad studio 2009
> 
> Was the project upgraded automatically? (Autoupgrade causes problems
> with paths, libs, etc. more often than not.)
> 
> If so I advise you to create new project in XE, add needed files and
> see if this helps.
> 
> --
> Alex
I think you're right Alex. I just clicked open project and pointed xe6 to the existing project.
0
Tom
7/16/2015 6:48:02 AM
Reply: