From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles W. Sandmann)
Subject:	djgpp and emx (fwd)
To:	djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Date:	Fri, 26 Feb 1993 19:44:23 -0600 (CST)

> From: Richard Mansfield <melvin AT math DOT psu DOT edu>
> Subject: djgpp and emx
> 
> Since there are two gcc ports to DOS, emx and djgpp, which should I
> choose. Of course, emx also works with OS/2. What are the other
> differences which would lead to choosing one over the other?

emx has a port of the GDB debugger for DOS, and the current release uses 
2.3.3 of GCC.  It also has a curses library.  It does not let you get
close to the hardware.

DJGPP has much better graphics support in the GRX libraries, better
keyboard and mouse handling in the event library, can be built on a DOS
system, includes all source (in case you want to modify the extender).
You can easily write directly to hardware using DJGPP (video card, other
strange devices in upper memory or very high memory).
Through use of 16 bit TSR's (and in some cases very minor mods to the
extender) you can do virtually anything.

So, if you are porting unix code, character cell only, emx is a good choice
(especially if it uses curses).  If you have any plans to experiment with
OS/2 2.0 (recommended) the code will run without mods.

If you are porting DOS applications to 32 bit, and need to interface with 
any devices (async, video, etc) or are writing custom code for the PC 
architecture, DJGPP gives you more options.

Anyone feel free to correct mistakes above, but I personally keep both
compilers on my system.  The editor I use day in and day out is a DEC-EDT
lookalike (with wildcard, multi-window, box-cut-paste etc enhancements)
which is compiled using DJGPP for the superior keyboard handling.  (Yes,
NumLock is the Gold key, damnit...)  Someday I will post it if anyone
is interested, but thats a different subject (also runs on sparcs, RS6000, etc)

- Raw text -