Mail Archives: djgpp/1996/10/17/13:19:10
Marc H. Bryant wrote:
> I have been shopping around for a C compiler
> I could get your advice on how it compares with
> Borland's Turbo C/C++ (for dos... v3.0 i think).
Well, it depends on what you care about.
For quality, GET DJGPP. It generates almost infinitely better code than
Turbo C.
For ease of use and easier learning, get Turbo C. It's designed toward
new programmers. I used it for a few years, and it worked well; but I
soon outgrew its capabilities. (you just can't do much with 286 code)
However, there is a nice graphics tutorial series that works with Turbo
C, written by Denthor/Asphyxia and translated to C by Snowman/Hornet.
Note that Turbo C is quite limited because it generates, at best, 286
code (and is limited to 64k segments). There are ways to use bigger
blocks of memory, but these methods are generally much more difficult
than simply switching to a better compiler.
DJGPP generates 386, 486, or Pentium code (I hear PPro support is coming
soon); and comes with a very nice DPMI host. You can use up to 256MB of
RAM, and probably more with the continual updates to the compiler.
There are tutorials available for DJGPP, too. Turbo C comes with a
small tutorial in its manual, but the tutorial is really not a great
place to learn from. After a few years, I'm still unlearning all the
bad habits I picked up from the Turbo C manual.
I really don't know which compiler you should get, but I would say if
you get Turbo C you should also get DJGPP after using Turbo C for a
while. Turbo C, really, should be used only as a learning tool for C;
and for rather simple programs.
-- Yamaha / XYZZ
mailto:scriven AT CS DOT ColoState DOT edu
mailto:scriven AT VIS DOT ColoState DOT edu
http://www.vis.colostate.edu/~scriven/
- Raw text -