Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/01/19/01:58:24
DJGPP is a DOS port of GCC - I have no idea what you need to do in order to
make it producing win32 apps easily. You may want to try something else
which is windows related rather than DOS.
--
Alexei A. Frounze
alexfru [AT] chat [DOT] ru
frounze [AT] ece [DOT] rochester [DOT] edu
http://alexfru.chat.ru
http://members.xoom.com/alexfru/
http://welcome.to/pmode/
"Mike Darrett" <ez073236 AT mailbox DOT ucdavis DOT edu> wrote in message
news:Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 21 DOT 0101181822520 DOT 57-100000 AT runner DOT ucdavis DOT edu...
> Yes, I am quite impressed with the DJGPP implementation of
> gcc... unfortunately, gcc/g++
> on my Mandrake Linux 7.2 made an executable which was about the same speed
> as the Borland C++ 5.5 code. (Actually I'm still recovering from this
> since Mandrake killed my C and D Win98 partitions (although I can access
> them from /mnt/win_c and /mnt/win_d, strangely enough...))
>
> I *would* use DJGPP for future development, but... does it support Windows
> apps with OpenGL? Borland C++ 5.5 does, and... well, even if it is a bit
> slower, might have to settle for second best in this case...
>
> Btw, in response to an earlier post about alignment, I forced BCC5.5 to
> align on 8-byte boundaries and still no faster...
>
> Thanks for the thoughts
>
> Mike
>
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Alexei A. Frounze wrote:
>
> > Believe me GCC is quite good at optimization (well, when you helped it
with
> > nice algorithm and source).
> > Around a year ago I had a bet in this NG that I can make a faster
> > implementation of my texture mapper in C+ASM mix rather than nearly
plain C.
> > But in fact, eventually I got nearly the same thing when used 100% of
GCC
> > capabilities and no extra ASM at all (well, probably just 1 or 2 ASM
> > instructions which is not a lot :). I was also wondered by the fact that
GCC
> > beats Watcom. I've thought that Watcom is one of best C compilers before
I
> > got GCC. But when I saw than my 3d-engine comiled by Watcom is about
twice
> > as slow as compiled by GCC...
> >
> > :)
> >
> > Happy coding with GCC!
> > --
> > Alexei A. Frounze
> > alexfru [AT] chat [DOT] ru
> > frounze [AT] ece [DOT] rochester [DOT] edu
> > http://alexfru.chat.ru
> > http://members.xoom.com/alexfru/
> > http://welcome.to/pmode/
> >
> > "Mike Darrett" <ez073236 AT mailbox DOT ucdavis DOT edu> wrote in message
> > news:Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 21 DOT 0101172014390 DOT 7634-100000 AT sandman DOT ucdavis DOT edu...
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > I was running some algorithm benchmarks on DJGPP vs Borland C++ 5.5,
and
> > > was shocked to see that DJGPP outperformed Borland C++ on some stack
> > > tests. Using a linked list to simulate a stack, adding and removing
80,000
> > > entries took 1.8 seconds on my AMDK6-2 350, but took 2.5 seconds on
> > > Borland C++, compiled without the -tW option (since it is a console
app).
> > >
> > > Any ideas? Is Borland C++ using thunking to access memory? Is DJGPP
simply
> > > more efficient? Would like to get any input before I try optimizing
the
> > > code any further.
> > >
> > > This was a homework assignment, but was meant only to test different
> > > algorithms vs each other, and not vs other compilers. The homework
> > > assignment can be seen
> > > at: http://wwwcsif.cs.ucdavis.edu/~davis/110/prog1.html
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Mike Darrett
> > > mrdarrett AT ucdavis DOT edu
> > > http://mdarrett.freeyellow.com
> > >
> > > Get a free Windows C++ compiler! With STL, OpenGL and DirectX support.
> > > http://www.borland.com/bcppbuilder/freecompiler/
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Mike Darrett
> mrdarrett AT ucdavis DOT edu
> http://mdarrett.freeyellow.com
>
> Get a free Windows C++ compiler! With STL, OpenGL and DirectX support.
> http://www.borland.com/bcppbuilder/freecompiler/
>
>
- Raw text -