Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 10:04:45 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Jason Green <news AT jgreen4 DOT fsnet DOT co DOT uk>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Executable size: limit to acceptability?
In-Reply-To: <66178s4ikrcjf3admm9mbc6gcbf39heg1r@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000118100244.3041J-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, Jason Green wrote:

> I am curious how many people in this group use PGCC, and what for.  Is
> it just for speed-freaks ;) or are there other reasons for using it?  

IMHO, there are actually good reasons NOT to install it.  Many people 
report that it is unstable and produces unstable code.  Now that mainline 
GCC supports Pentium in a reasonable way, I cannot imagine why would 
someone want PGCC.

Also, I think the DJGPP support in PGCC is outdated.