Mail Archives: djgpp/1996/04/22/22:13:43
On Mon, 22 Apr 1996, Don Karnage wrote:
>
> Is it me or is DJGPP v2 really hmm a regression compared with the
> v1.12 version? It takes a lot more space (having to deal with the library
> sources wich do not take a lot of space but with 8k minimum for each files
> it takes 18M). Its takes a LOT more memory (I could compile programs with
> v1.12 with my 8M .. now I run out of Vmemory .. (I'll check the faq so don't
> reply to this one ;) )). I also made a very simple program which used
> CONIO.H and PC.H using -lpc and the ScreenPrimary buffer... Now I can't
> compile it having to deal with "
>
> invalid types ong unsigned int[int]' for array subscript
> invalid types ong unsigned int[int]' for array subscript
> invalid types ong unsigned int[int]' for array subscript
> invalid types ong unsigned int[int]' for array subscript
>
> pointing to where I was using ScreenPrimary ..
>
> ScreenPrimary[pos_y * 80 + 31] 3
> ((ScreenPrimary[pos_y * 80 + 31] & (0x00FF)) | 0x7C00);
>
>
> And is it really a good thing having to deal with a DPMI host all the time?
> All it does is wasting memory! Try to convince me please!
> I'm a little pissed off since I passed many hours download the whole archive
> (I know all of you did but..) and I'd really like to compile programs like I
> used to be able to with v1.12! (I'm running Win95 and linux, using DJGPP
> within w95 of course; if you're interrested to know about my OS). Anyway I'm
> rather disapointed.. if you *could* help me with it
>
>
I did notice the slowdown, larger memory footprint, etc. But (IMO) we got
a lot of good stuff too. Like it's supposed to be more stable, etc. I
wouldn't care much for that, except the SIGNALS. v2 is MUCH closer to a
POSIX programming environment than the old version.
Just my 0.02 worth...
Orlando A. Andico
orly AT mozcom2 DOT mozcom DOT com
- Raw text -