Message-Id: <199705120624.IAA19193@grendel.sylaba.poznan.pl> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Mark Habersack" Organization: PPP (Pesticide Powered Pumpkins) To: Chris Matrakidis Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 08:25:56 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: PE executable format Reply-to: grendel AT hoth DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, djgpp AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: <5363.9705081458@lupus> Precedence: bulk Once upon a time (on 8 May 97 at 15:58) Chris Matrakidis said: > > > My point was that in the MSDOS/Windows world there are many tools that > > > support PE executables. Compatibility with them can only benefit DJGPP. > > True, but I'm also thinking about the benefits of a format itself. ELF is > > much more modern and better designed than COFF in general and PE in > > particular. If changing/adding the output format, why not to use the best > > one? > > > I think that PE's widespread use makes it a better choice than ELF. Yes this certainly has its benefits. I guess I'm just biased - I don't like Micro$lotha and I consider ELF to be a better format (despite my feelings about M$). Besides, Charles was right in the other message - instead of talking, I should start coding. But, alas, I am not an object format wizard... ---------------------------------------------------------- Doctor said my liver looks like living with my lover - needs another time-out now. Like any sort of hero turning down to zero, standing out in any crowd. [snip] Dr. Finlay: And my advice is if you maintain this lifestyle you won't reach 30... ----