From:	qed AT chromatic DOT com (Paul Hsieh)
Newsgroups:	comp.lang.c++,comp.os.msdos.djgpp,rec.games.programmer
Subject:	Re: The numer 1 compiler, DJGPP or MSVC Here's a good rating comparision
Date:	Wed, 17 Sep 1997 00:33:44 -0700
Organization:	Chromatic Research Inc.
Lines:	43
Message-ID:	<MPG.e8927b0e913eaf89896e9@nntp.chromatic.com>
References:	<3412BD25 DOT 1F30 AT mho DOT net> <5uuqci$15l AT sjx-ixn5 DOT ix DOT netcom DOT com> <34131883 DOT 29A3 AT mho DOT net> <341714E9 DOT F6CC2E67 AT rpi DOT edu> <34184FB9 DOT 441D AT cam DOT org> <34185990 DOT 3DFA AT sensor DOT com> <34189915 DOT 79BB AT cam DOT org> <5vhpcs$sd$1 AT news DOT internetsat DOT com> <341cec0c DOT 0 AT 139 DOT 134 DOT 5 DOT 33> <01bcc1b3$ccb39840$2b40cbc2 AT russnt> <341e2691 DOT 0 AT 139 DOT 134 DOT 5 DOT 33> <adtEGMnHy DOT Atw AT netcom DOT com> <341f8541 DOT 0 AT 139 DOT 134 DOT 5 DOT 33>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	172.16.192.28
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

On 17 Sep 97 07:22:41 GMT, Herman Schoenfeld said:
> >: ... There are no MSVC compilers for them so any comment comparing 
> >: GCC to MSVC is pretty much a waste of bandwidth. 
> >
> >Wrong. Some of us can read assembly language files generated by 
> >compilers. Some of us can link modules from "foreign" compilers that 
> >don't natively target a particular environment.
> 
> No, it's not "wrong". MSVC doesn't support linux. Why must you fill this 
> newgroup with your lies?

My understanding is that MSVC's object format is a well documented, 
publically known format called "COM" which is not specifically tied to 
the Windows operating system.  What this means is that you can take code 
compiled from C/C++ into .OBJ files, and if you've crafted your own 
linker, you can splice them together for whatever OS you want on the x86 
so long as it supports 32 bit FLAT mode programming.

> >: DJGPP does support pentium optimising. (PGCC).
> >
> >Misleading. The patched compiler sometimes (not often) produces code that
> >is slower than the original 486 optimizer's code.

More to the point, I believe this compiler can generate code which is 
incorrect (that was the status last I checked).

> Wait 6months-1year and DJGPP will fully support pentium optimizations along 
> with a myriad of other features making it ideal choice for game programmers.

You've got to be kidding.  Who's going to put their project on hold for 6 
months just so that they can wait for a compiler to catch up to a chip 
that will be obsolete?  When will djgpp have P-II optimizations?

> (ie, full support for windows, full support for directx (if not already))

That would be impressive, considering Microsoft is not going to support 
them in any way.  That's not to say its impossible (reverse engineering 
can go a long way) but even WATCOM needed inside information and 
cooperation from Microsoft to get Direct X working with their compiler.

-- 
Paul Hsieh
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/9498/mailme.html

- Raw text -