From:	"John M. Aldrich" <fighteer AT cs DOT net>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Display question...
Date:	Fri, 28 Aug 1998 19:02:57 -0400
Organization:	Two pounds of chaos and a pinch of salt.
Lines:	34
Message-ID:	<35E73721.D2D248D0@cs.net>
References:	<35E4E7EF DOT CF07B3F4 AT post DOT comstar DOT ru> <3 DOT 0 DOT 5 DOT 16 DOT 19980827202740 DOT 2cfff282 AT mail DOT tir DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	ppp206.cs.net
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Thomas J. Hruska wrote:
> 
> I'm writing a spreadsheet block converter in Borland Turbo C (16-bit) which
> I will compile under DJGPP once I've got it working.  DJGPP has poor
> error/warning alerts compared to Borland's (I use the IDE in both cases).

Without trying to argue with you, I want to ask if you've used the full
warning options that gcc has to offer.  Before doing this comparison,
make sure to check the -Wall and -O switches in the compiler options. 
If you _really_ want gcc to generate warnings, add -W, -ansi, and/or
-pedantic.  :-)

> How badly is the performance cut since I only want to let the user know
> that the program is working and to please wait?  Since most of the activity
> of the program is hard drive related (and some blocks can take 5-10 seconds
> to process in a 16-bit environment), I figured 32-bit was the best way to
> go to speed things up a bit.
> 
> How long does it take to switch to and from real mode?

It depends largely on the speed of the system, from what I understand. 
However, have you considered using the <conio.h> functions for this kind
of busy wait output?  They are much more suited for the task than stdio
functions.

-- 
John M. Aldrich, aka Fighteer I <fighteer AT cs DOT net>  UIN# 7406319

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS d- s+:- a-->? C++>$ U@>++$ p>+ L>++ E>++ W++ N++ o+>++ K? w(---)
O- M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP- t+(-) 5- X- R+(++) tv+() b+++ DI++ D++ G>++
e(*)>++++ h!() !r !y+()
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

- Raw text -