Mail Archives: djgpp/1993/03/12/06:29:06
Hi, everybody...
I've tried both, the latest version of EMX/GCC (0.8f) and DJGPP 1.09 wit
LIBGRX 1.02.
EMX/GCC DJGPP
Debugger ++ (GDB) + (DEBUG32)
Graphics +- (320x200x256) ++ (LIBGRX)
Libraries + ++
curses BSD y
windowing lib y ?
ANSI C y y
C++ ? y
Objective C ? (y, I believe) y
OS/2 y n
virtual memory y y
DPMI n n
VCPI y y
QEMM386, 386MAX y y
low hardware acc. + ++
int86x() + ++
comp. speed - -
exec. speed ++ ++
docs + ++ (libraries --> - !)
I don't want to tell you some lies, and I don't think, my opinion
is the only opinion, but these list results from the impressions
I had experimenting with both compilers at the same time.
Both compilers have their own highlights (EMX/GCC --> OS/2 support,
GDB, clear docs for libraries; DJGPP --> rich libraries, excellent
graphics support for SVGA) and it's difficult to choose one and only
one of them. EMX is great for porting text-based applications from
UNIX to OS/2. DJGPP is great for porting nearly every C code to DOS
(but ONLY DOS !).
If GDB would work together with DJGPP, a lot of people I know would
choose DJGPP instead of EMX/GCC. If there'd be a graphics lib similar
to CBGRX for EMX/GCC, maybe I'd switch to EMX/GCC.
Any comments and corrections to the check list are appreciated and
welcome.
...Matthias
_____________________________________________________________________
| |
| Matthias Burian Institut fuer Analytische Chemie |
| a8411gac AT awiuni11 DOT edvz DOT univie DOT ac DOT at Universitaet Wien |
|_____________________________________________________________________|
- Raw text -