Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:54:44 +0200 (MDT) Message-Id: <3.0.16.19970606114648.27b7f484@hem1.passagen.se> To: Eli Zaretskii From: Peter Palotas Subject: Re: New version of DJGPP? Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Precedence: bulk At 11.18 1997-06-05 +0300, you wrote: > >On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Peter Palotas wrote: > >> How are things going with the next version of DJGPP? >> >> What news will it include? > >Is anything wrong with v2.01? > Well, if you look at the footnote in my message I think you will discover that I in no way think that DJGPP is a bad product. In fact it's the best programming tool I've ever come across, and it's amazing that it also is free. I must thank you and all the other people that have contributed to DJGPP, it's just a so great product... Thank you all! But, there are things to be improved ofcourse. Pentium optimizations, multitasking and other stuff that I don't know about yet. Yes, I know that there is a version made by the Pentium Compiler Group (Or something like that) which has optimizations, but that is not an official release and I know that there also is a multitasking library, but I always feel somewhat more confident with official releases! =) And I was just interested in what was being worked on right now, and what I can expect to see in the next version. =) So please do not take this as a complaint, because as previously mentioned I think DJGPP is great! // Blizzar -- blizzar AT hem1 DOT passagen DOT se -- http://hem1.passagen.se/dnt **************************************************************************** Don't tell me about the answer, 'cause then another one will come along soon I don't believe you have the answer, I've got ideas too But if you got enough naivity, and you got conviction then the answer is perfect for you! // Bad Religion - Generator, The Answer ****************************************************************************