From:	bergervo AT iaehv DOT IAEhv DOT nl (Jos Bergervoet)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: How fast is DJGPP?
Date:	25 Aug 1997 20:03:57 GMT
Organization:	Internet Access Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Lines:	20
Message-ID:	<5tsofd$4rn$1@news.IAEhv.nl>
References:	<33F32C35 DOT 7C8B AT voyageur DOT ca> <33F4D499 DOT 52C15699 AT spectra DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	iaehv.iaehv.nl
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Tom Novelli <tcn AT spectra DOT net> writes:

>J.E. wrote:
>> 
>> I have just one question that people seem to be afraid to answer, no
>> matter how many times I post it.  How fast is DJGPP compared to other
>> ...

> ...
>Originally it was compiled with Turbo C.  Then the author switched to
>Watcom C, and the speed doubled.  A few months later, he switched to
>DJGPP for an 8% speed increase.

I noticed almost exactly the same for a number crunching app. (matrix
diagonalization as the bottle-neck.) DJGPP about 10% faster than Watcom,
Borland 100% slower. Fortran versions of numerical programs are about
the same speed as DJGPP on a PC.

---
  Jos
commend
getting one.

in C array indices start from 0. so, if you have an array with n
elements, the indices range from 0 to n-1. in your example,
lost_of_ints[4] would be the fifth element of that. AFAIK, dereferencing
one past the end of an array is legal but writing there is not.

> This snippet of code would get an error such as "array subscript out 
> of bounds" (I'm not sure exactly what it was, this is the jist of it). 

so, the compiler told you exactly what was wrong.
-- 
   Sinan
 
*******************************************************************
 A. Sinan Unur                                WWWWWW
                                              |--O+O
 mailto:sinan DOT unur AT cornell DOT edu                C   ^ 
 http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/asu1/     \  ~/ 
*******************************************************************

- Raw text -