Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:49:35 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Mark Habersack <grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
Reply-To: grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl
To: Elliott Oti <e DOT oti AT stud DOT warande DOT ruu DOT nl>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Is djgpp better than Watcom C?
In-Reply-To: <32650732.101F@stud.warande.ruu.nl>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.95.961017104817.16494G-100000@ananke.amu.edu.pl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Wed, 16 Oct 1996, Elliott Oti wrote:

>Switch? Go ahead and try them both, if you already have Watcom; djgpp is 
>free. With a little careful coding and a few #ifdefs you can write code that
>will compile on both. Aside from inline asm and interrupt handlers the two
>work pretty much the same.
>Advantage Watcom: you can program for Windows too.
NULL for Watcom. With DJGPP you can also program for Widows. Just get the
RSXNTDJ package.
 
>Advantage djgpp: fastest-growing Dos compiler around.
>For the rest they're pretty much the same.

Result:
   DJGPP    WATCOM
     1   :    0

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Stand straight, look me in the eye and say goodbye
Stand straight, we drifted past the point of reasons why,
Yesterday starts tommorow, tommorow starts today,
The problems always seem to be
  we're picking up the pieces on the ricochet
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ http://ananke.amu.edu.pl/~grendel \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/