Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/04/21/22:54:36
On Mon, 21 Apr 1997 15:49:48 GMT, "Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)"
<salvador AT inti DOT edu DOT ar> wrote:
>Jon wrote:
>> if it is good enough
>> for the sort of cutting-edge, world-class programming technology guys
>> like Carmack and Abrash put in to Quake, it is certainly good enough
>> for most any DOS project brewing out there. IMHO.
>Be sure of that, but I preffer to say: If DJGPP is good enough to compile gcc
>then ...
>
>SET
True enough, that is definitely a sign of it's strength. But the fact
that DJGPP is a *DOS* compiler says to me that it is competing as much
on the game-development front as with UNIX users needing a DOS port.
I think to some extent it is the game market that keeps DOS alive. The
best, most amazing games still are basically DOS programs, because of
the depth of knowledge game makers have in the DOS environment, the
history of effort in it, and the libraries to draw upon. And there
still is nothing like getting down and dirty with a tiny,
lousy-but-negotiable operating system to work around when it comes to
games. DOS is a game platform!
Anyway, DJGPP is to me the alternative to Watcom- and certainly in
that role, it proves to be more than adequate, since it looks like the
guys at Id (obviously as close to programming gurus as they come)
dropped Watcom for DJGPP. Even if 90% of their core stuff is in
assembler, I still think it says something that they felt DJGPP could
meet their requirements for what they did want it for. Having the
source code to the compiler you are going to base some part of your
multi-million dollar product on must be a plus on that measure!
- Raw text -