From: eyal DOT ben-david AT aks DOT com
To: asu1 AT cornell DOT edu, new AT no_spam DOT com
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <42256529.002DD9F3.00@aks.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 11:23:08 +0200
Subject: Re: more newbie stupid question
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk





On 10/7/97 6:02:41 AM A. Sinan Unur wrote:

>Newbie wrote:
>>
>> I just got all the needed DJGPP files. I'd like to try them out soon.
>> I still have one more question.
>> How does DJGPP compare with commercial products such as VC and Watcom in
>> the following areas
>> 1. reliability and bugginess,
>> 2. compilation quality -- code speed, and memory footprint.
1. no less reliable and no less buggy. DJGPP users have the advantage fast
response
to their problems (through this list), fast bug correction etc  whereas
with the commercial
compilers it takes much longer.

2. no less fast. actually up to 486 it outperforms the others. still lacks
the optimizations for
pentium but not for long time.

Compiler is a tool and if it produces useful software then it must be a
good tool.
DJGPP produces: DJGPP itself, EMACS, RHIDE all GNU stuff , QUAKE and much
more.
so it is a good tool. (and I can give examples that the other products you
mentioned
are also good tools).

>i am begging everyone. please please not another this or that vs djgpp
>thread. and to the anonymous stupid newbie (since that seems to be your
>preferred name), you can read about such discussions either by perusing
>dj's mail archives (follow the links at http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/)
>or by going to dejanews and searching for them.
>
I think that the qustion did not cross the lines towards flame wars.
It is a legimate question and it is answered in the DJGPP FAQ.


Eyal