From: ao950 AT FreeNet DOT Carleton DOT CA (Paul Derbyshire)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: DirectX 5.0 Compatibilty [WAAAAY off topic!]
Date: 9 Aug 1997 06:46:05 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <5sh3nd$fg5@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <33E95E03 DOT 67E6 AT concentric DOT net> <5sdngj$id6$1 AT news DOT netrail DOT net>
Reply-To: ao950 AT FreeNet DOT Carleton DOT CA (Paul Derbyshire)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet2.carleton.ca
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk





Could you guys take the "which compiler is faster" holy wars over to
comp.lang.c or e-mail please? Considering you're babbling your heads off
about Watcom this, Borland that, Microsoft Visual C++ the other, and nary
a word about DJGPP, I'd wager good money everyone not actually wading into
this thread shares the opinion you guys are spamming the group.



ObDJGPP: I've never had compile times longer than ten minutes with DJGPP
on a crufty old 486-50. And it has as good code optimization as I've ever
seen... it's said to be faster than Watcom, but the big compiler companies
don't want you to know this so they likely pay the computer magazines and
newsletters good money not to publish any stats on DJGPP in their compiler
comparisons!

--
    .*.  Where feelings are concerned, answers are rarely simple [GeneDeWeese]
 -()  <  When I go to the theater, I always go straight to the "bag and mix"
    `*'  bulk candy section...because variety is the spice of life... [me]
Paul Derbyshire ao950 AT freenet DOT carleton DOT ca, http://chat.carleton.ca/~pderbysh