Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.os.msdos.djgpp,rec.games.programmer Subject: Re: The numer 1 compiler, DJGPP or MSVC Here's a good rating comparision From: you AT somehost DOT somedomain (Herman Schoenfeld) Organization: Your Organization References: <3412BD25 DOT 1F30 AT mho DOT net> <5uuqci$15l AT sjx-ixn5 DOT ix DOT netcom DOT com> <34131883 DOT 29A3 AT mho DOT net> <341714E9 DOT F6CC2E67 AT rpi DOT edu> <34184FB9 DOT 441D AT cam DOT org> <34185990 DOT 3DFA AT sensor DOT com> <34189915 DOT 79BB AT cam DOT org> <5vhpcs$sd$1 AT news DOT internetsat DOT com> <341cec0c DOT 0 AT 139 DOT 134 DOT 5 DOT 33> <01bcc1b3$ccb39840$2b40cbc2 AT russnt> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII NNTP-Posting-Host: 139.134.43.94 Message-ID: <341e2691.0@139.134.5.33> Date: 16 Sep 97 06:26:25 GMT Lines: 51 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk In article <01bcc1b3$ccb39840$2b40cbc2 AT russnt>, russ AT algorithm DOT demon DOT co DOT uk says... > >Herman Schoenfeld wrote in article ><341cec0c DOT 0 AT 139 DOT 134 DOT 5 DOT 33>... >> In article <5vhpcs$sd$1 AT news DOT internetsat DOT com>, frogger AT micronet DOT fr >says... >> > >> >>so many "not so cheap PC based UNIXes" ?? I thought GCC was a standard >> >>in the unix world... >> > >> >GCC is a standard, this doesnb't mean it's a good compiler : it's one of >the >> >WORST ! >> >> oh, and how do you figure that? > >The code it produces being worse than anything else? DJGPP doesn't support >Pentium optimising, yet VC5 supports the PPro (Watcom and Borland probably >do too). It isn't in the same league as commercial compilers. GCC doesn't >even >support C++ as well as everything else - templates are a good way to see >'internal compiler error', and I've personally had it fuck up on function >calling >(pushing the wrong parameters, ignoring return values). GCC is great for >doing >C programs, and allows code to be remarkably portable, but it isn't the >best. DJGPP isn't that bad. GCC on unix/linux is standard. There are no MSVC compilers for them so any comment comparing GCC to MSVC is pretty much a waste of bandwidth. If you're comparinh MSVC with DJGPP, you're wrong in all instances. DJGPP does support c++. DJGPP does support pentium optimising. (PGCC). DJGPP produces fast optimized code. Sure, DJGPP doesn't have nice little point-and-click features but most people don't need them. > >GCC is a very nice, capable, free compiler, but FFS, the best people in >compiler optimisation earn lots of money working for MS, Intel, Borland, >Watcom, Symantec, SGI, Sun, DEC, HP etc. They don't work for free. With flawed logic like that its no wonder you have such trouble with programming. Just because somebody charges $250 p/hour to produce a compiler like Turbo C++ it certainatly doesn't make it better than something produced by hundreds of people who already make enough money and contribute to a compiler such as DJGPP. You can put all your compilers together and you won't get even half the support DJGPP has.