From: Mike Darrett Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: compiler efficiency Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 20:15:06 -0800 Organization: University of California, Davis Lines: 27 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.ucdavis.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: woodrow.ucdavis.edu 979791312 4041 169.237.105.36 (18 Jan 2001 04:15:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet AT ucdavis DOT edu NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 04:15:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender: ez073236 AT sandman DOT ucdavis DOT edu To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Hi guys, I was running some algorithm benchmarks on DJGPP vs Borland C++ 5.5, and was shocked to see that DJGPP outperformed Borland C++ on some stack tests. Using a linked list to simulate a stack, adding and removing 80,000 entries took 1.8 seconds on my AMDK6-2 350, but took 2.5 seconds on Borland C++, compiled without the -tW option (since it is a console app). Any ideas? Is Borland C++ using thunking to access memory? Is DJGPP simply more efficient? Would like to get any input before I try optimizing the code any further. This was a homework assignment, but was meant only to test different algorithms vs each other, and not vs other compilers. The homework assignment can be seen at: http://wwwcsif.cs.ucdavis.edu/~davis/110/prog1.html Thanks, Mike Darrett mrdarrett AT ucdavis DOT edu http://mdarrett.freeyellow.com Get a free Windows C++ compiler! With STL, OpenGL and DirectX support. http://www.borland.com/bcppbuilder/freecompiler/