From: bergervo AT iaehv DOT IAEhv DOT nl (Jos Bergervoet) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: How fast is DJGPP? Date: 25 Aug 1997 20:03:57 GMT Organization: Internet Access Eindhoven, the Netherlands Lines: 20 Message-ID: <5tsofd$4rn$1@news.IAEhv.nl> References: <33F32C35 DOT 7C8B AT voyageur DOT ca> <33F4D499 DOT 52C15699 AT spectra DOT net> NNTP-Posting-Host: iaehv.iaehv.nl To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk Tom Novelli writes: >J.E. wrote: >> >> I have just one question that people seem to be afraid to answer, no >> matter how many times I post it. How fast is DJGPP compared to other >> ... > ... >Originally it was compiled with Turbo C. Then the author switched to >Watcom C, and the speed doubled. A few months later, he switched to >DJGPP for an 8% speed increase. I noticed almost exactly the same for a number crunching app. (matrix diagonalization as the bottle-neck.) DJGPP about 10% faster than Watcom, Borland 100% slower. Fortran versions of numerical programs are about the same speed as DJGPP on a PC. --- Jos commend getting one. in C array indices start from 0. so, if you have an array with n elements, the indices range from 0 to n-1. in your example, lost_of_ints[4] would be the fifth element of that. AFAIK, dereferencing one past the end of an array is legal but writing there is not. > This snippet of code would get an error such as "array subscript out > of bounds" (I'm not sure exactly what it was, this is the jist of it). so, the compiler told you exactly what was wrong. -- Sinan ******************************************************************* A. Sinan Unur WWWWWW |--O+O mailto:sinan DOT unur AT cornell DOT edu C ^ http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/asu1/ \ ~/ *******************************************************************