From: "AndrewJ" Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp References: <001801bfccea$0782f620$0d00a8c0 AT mike> <40cijsgo8fojuuba5hhl2kqg2pgkvbk1kl AT 4ax DOT com> Subject: [OT] Re: Internal compiler error Lines: 19 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 00:27:03 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.42.120.18 X-Complaints-To: abuse AT home DOT net X-Trace: news2.rdc1.on.home.com 960078423 24.42.120.18 (Sat, 03 Jun 2000 17:27:03 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 17:27:03 PDT Organization: @Home Network Canada To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com > They weren't done with "Watcom C++ Rather Than DJGPP"; they were done > with "the only decent 32-bit compiler out at the time." They were done > with Watcom presumably because DJGPP 2 wasn't out yet. Symantec/Zortech C++ generated 32-bit DOS extended code. I have a lot of respect for this compiler, even though it didn't really go anywhere in the end. Borland C++ 3.1 could generate DPMI-using code (I think, I never use it). Microsoft and Borland compilers could be used to generate 286 PMode code using the Pharlap DOS extender (16 MB of memory, which was a lot at the time). It wasn't a matter of lack of selection. It was a matter of which one was the best. Watcom -was- a great product, until it was sold to Powersoft, and then Sybase. It started to go downhill with the 11.0 release. Andrew