Date: Fri, 12 Mar 93 12:17:05 MEZ From: Matthias Burian Subject: Re: thanks and EMX/GCC versus DJGPP To: djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu Hi, everybody... I've tried both, the latest version of EMX/GCC (0.8f) and DJGPP 1.09 wit LIBGRX 1.02. EMX/GCC DJGPP Debugger ++ (GDB) + (DEBUG32) Graphics +- (320x200x256) ++ (LIBGRX) Libraries + ++ curses BSD y windowing lib y ? ANSI C y y C++ ? y Objective C ? (y, I believe) y OS/2 y n virtual memory y y DPMI n n VCPI y y QEMM386, 386MAX y y low hardware acc. + ++ int86x() + ++ comp. speed - - exec. speed ++ ++ docs + ++ (libraries --> - !) I don't want to tell you some lies, and I don't think, my opinion is the only opinion, but these list results from the impressions I had experimenting with both compilers at the same time. Both compilers have their own highlights (EMX/GCC --> OS/2 support, GDB, clear docs for libraries; DJGPP --> rich libraries, excellent graphics support for SVGA) and it's difficult to choose one and only one of them. EMX is great for porting text-based applications from UNIX to OS/2. DJGPP is great for porting nearly every C code to DOS (but ONLY DOS !). If GDB would work together with DJGPP, a lot of people I know would choose DJGPP instead of EMX/GCC. If there'd be a graphics lib similar to CBGRX for EMX/GCC, maybe I'd switch to EMX/GCC. Any comments and corrections to the check list are appreciated and welcome. ...Matthias _____________________________________________________________________ | | | Matthias Burian Institut fuer Analytische Chemie | | a8411gac AT awiuni11 DOT edvz DOT univie DOT ac DOT at Universitaet Wien | |_____________________________________________________________________|