Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 08:17:05 +0800 (GMT)
From: Orlando Andico <orly AT dilnet DOT upd DOT edu DOT ph>
To: Weiqi Gao <weiqigao AT a DOT crl DOT com>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: troll bait
In-Reply-To: <3412DDA8.C428AF45@a.crl.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.93.970908081502.1721D-100000@gibson>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 7 Sep 1997, Weiqi Gao wrote:

..
> EMACS crashed the Visual Workbench in MSVC 1.0 Pro.
> 
> > command line compiling: MSVC is lousy when you want to compile at the
> > command line.  You have to put in so many options!  DJGPP is easier.
> 
> Wrong again, DJGPP has many more command line options than MSVC.  MSVC's
> options can be described in only two 25x80 screens, while DJGPP (well,
> gcc)'s options needs at least ten screens.
> 
> > Overall, on a scale of 1-10, I'd give MSVC a 7 and DJGPP a four.
> 
> DJGPP should be at least a nine.

At the risk of "flooding the newsgroup" :)

It's not really instructive to compare MSVC and DJGPP. If ever I use MSVC,
it'll be so that I can build Windows GUI apps with minimal pain, without
suffering the inelegance of Visual Basic. And I use DJGPP not to produce
Windows apps, but to retain close-to-100% source compatibility with the
UNIX stuff I write. I wouldn't try to shoehorn one compiler to do what the
other is much better at.
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Orlando Alcantara Andico
WWW:   http://www2.mozcom.com/~orly/         Email: orly AT mozcom DOT com
ICBM:  14 30 00 N  120 59 00 E               POTS:  (+632) 932-2385