From: Ron Hiler <bndwgn AT pacbell DOT net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.os.msdos.djgpp,rec.games.programmer
Subject: Re: The numer 1 compiler, DJGPP or MSVC  Here's a good rating comparision
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 16:49:28 -0700
Organization: Pacific Bell Internet Services
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <34148F08.7A16@pacbell.net>
References: <3412BD25 DOT 1F30 AT mho DOT net> <3412DDA8 DOT C428AF45 AT a DOT crl DOT com> <341316EA DOT E14 AT mho DOT net> <34158665 DOT 8731090 AT news DOT concentric DOT net>
Reply-To: bndwgn AT pacbell DOT net
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-206-170-3-178.okld03.pacbell.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

Avery Lee wrote:
Only the
> crappiest of 32-bit compilers (hmmm... Borland? :) ) would be beaten by a
> 16-bit compiler in terms of the speed of a serious program.
> 
> 
> -- Avery Lee (Psilon AT concentric DOT net)

This comment is of some concern to me.  I use Borland compilers, and am
about to upgrade to the new version (either Builder or 5.0 (right?)). 
Is there some significant reason Borland is bad?  Should I go with
something else? (Please dont say DJGPP, I'm addicted to the IDE).

I'm not interested in getting drawn into a best compiler war, but if
there is a good reason to avoid the new Borland compilers, I would like
to know before I go spend several hundred dollars on one.

Thanks.

Ron
-- 
The garbage shute!  What a wonderful idea!  What an incredible smell
you've discovered!