From: "melkor" <melkor AT intergate DOT bc DOT ca>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Commercial Games
Date: 21 Apr 1997 02:13:19 GMT
Organization: Internet Gateway Corporation
Message-ID: <01bc4df9$cad6c700$e4b522cf@MyComputer.intergate.bc.ca>
References: <2 DOT 2 DOT 32 DOT 19970416223156 DOT 006aee48 AT gate72> <5j3phb$pn6 AT nr1 DOT toronto DOT istar DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm20s3.intergate.bc.ca
Lines: 12
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

> Why not!?!  DJGPP is fast and free.  It's perfect for games.  ID
> origionally used Watcom C, which is expensive and about the same speed
> of DJGPP (anybody have any real speed comparisons?).  Perhaps they
> thought they'd just try out DJGPP and see what it's like... since it's
> obviosly a worthy competitor against Watcom.

I started our game in Watcom C++ v10.6, but then converted it to DJGPP v2
(took about a few days). Didn't notice much speed difference on a pentium,
but you could notice quite a difference on a 486 (about 15-20% faster).
BUT the compiled exe was 1.4 megs (it was 300k with Watcom). The 1.4mb
file managed to be compressed by pkzip to the same size as the watcom exe
(compressed), so it didn't make any difference.