From:	"Andrew Jones" <luminous-is AT home DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	<Damian Y> Re: It's back, but the ...
Lines:	91
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:	<7r4q4.45719$45.2400743@news2.rdc1.on.home.com>
Date:	Tue, 15 Feb 2000 04:17:07 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host:	24.42.120.18
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT home DOT net
X-Trace:	news2.rdc1.on.home.com 950588227 24.42.120.18 (Mon, 14 Feb 2000 20:17:07 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Mon, 14 Feb 2000 20:17:07 PST
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

[snip]

Damian, I know how much you advocate DJGPP, I feel as strongly as Watcom (and I
*do* like DJGPP), but I'd like to point a few things out in regards to your
Mini-FAQ.

> Q: I'm looking for a DOS compiler. Why DJGPP?
>
> A: Watcom C++ was a payware C/C++ compiler that made 32-bit DOS
> binaries. You can recognize a program built with Watcom because it
> will generally come with the DOS extender DOS4GW.EXE. According to
> Sascha Bendinger <digana AT t-online DOT de>, it has been shelved by
> Powersoft and is no longer developed.

The compiler has indeed been shelved, but there are things in the works (that I
am unfortunately not privy to).
Those interested should follow the
forums.powersoft.com/powersoft.public.watcom.c_c++.general newsgroup.
Also, technically it is Sybase Watcom C/C++, not Powersoft anymore.  Although
this is irrelevent to your FAQ :)

> DJGPP, on the other hand, is a free C/C++ compiler that makes 32-bit
> DOS binaries. DJGPP programs often come with a DOS extender
> called CWSDPMI, but a compatible extender is built into Windows 3.1
> and later.

Windows 3.1 *Enhanced Mode*.  You might want to point this out.  And the GPL
definition of "free" is definately not what the normal person thinks of free.
Also, it's not so much an extender that's built into Windows, it's a DPMI host.

> "Well, for me it is one factor - price. I cannot spend the hundreds
> (or thousands) I'll need to pay in my local currency for Watcom. Along
> with that, I sincerely believe DJGPP's "after sales support" (if you
> can term it that for a free compiler) is 100% better, it is regularly
> updated, has diversified widely (GCC on which it is based is widely
> used on almost all Unix implementations) it has a good track record
> (e.g. Quake was coded in it) it produced fast code, is very stable,
> well debugged, etc - I have used it extensively for a hobbyist
> programmer and I have NEVER had ANY trouble that could be attributed
> to a buggy compiler, preproccessor, assembler or whatever. Plus, tips
> and techniques for doing almost anything, from sound programming to
> high resolution hi color programming is widely and very importantly
> FREELY available - which I am quite sure does not apply to Watcom in
> most instances."
> (Stefan Viljoen <rylan AT intekom DOT com>)

Watcom cost me $500 Canadian.  That's nowhere near "thousands".  Hundreds yes,
thousands, no.  Also, DJGPP is known for Quake.  Watcom is known for DOZENS of
games (well, maybe not that many, but lots!), as well as much other software.
System Commander comes to mind, and I've heard parts of OS/2 were compiled with
Watcom.  It was also used by Novell for their DR-DOS.  It seems to me that the
only successful software ever written using DJGPP is Quake.  I'm not including
libraries others have written (Allegro, they all scream, is successful), I'm
talking about popular, well used software.

Also, bug reports can still be submitted to Sybase.  They will be incorporated
into the 11.0c final update.  And DJGPP has had its share of bugs and problems.
Less so these days, but in its earlier years.  And it seems to be a
particularily difficult compiler for "newbies" to use and set up.  Also, when
Watcom was at its height, there was almost as much information available for it
as there is for DJGPP.  Libraries, examples, documentation, all were in
abundance.

Portability may be wonderful for DJGPP, but consider that Watcom can target
16-bit real-mode DOS, 32-bit protected-mode DOS, Windows 3.x, Windows 9x,
Windows NT, QNX, Novel Netware, and (broken) ELF.  DJGPP handles 32-bit
protected mode DOS.

> Q: How do I do (graphics)?
> Q: How do I do (sound)?
> Q: How do I do (mouse)?
>
> A: The Allegro library by Shawn Hargreaves et al. handles the
> keyboard, mouse, joystick, graphics, waves, and MIDI. Version 3.931
> works on mingw32, Linux, DJGPP, and even dreaded Watcom C++, Microsoft
> Visual C++, and Borland C++Builder.

I take particular offense to the use of "dreaded" and "Watcom C++" in the same
sentence.  Are you sure you haven't misplaced the dreaded?  Dreaded Microsoft
Visual C++ sounds far more appropriate.  Watcom was, and IMHO still is, *the
best* optimizing compiler available (for DOS at least).

I don't want to fuel a "which compiler is best" flame war, but your degrading
references to Watcom do grate on me.  It seems to indicate that you are
uninformed and ignorant, which I know for a fact that you are not.

AndrewJ

- Raw text -