From: DigitalFx <digitalfx AT sprynet DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.os.msdos.djgpp,rec.games.programmer
Subject: Re: The numer 1 compiler, DJGPP or MSVC  Here's a good rating comparision
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 21:14:22 -0400
Organization: Sprynet News Service
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <341745EE.600B@sprynet.com>
References: <3412BD25 DOT 1F30 AT mho DOT net> <3412DDA8 DOT C428AF45 AT a DOT crl DOT com> <341316EA DOT E14 AT mho DOT net> <34158665 DOT 8731090 AT news DOT concentric DOT net> <34148F08 DOT 7A16 AT pacbell DOT net> <5v5fm1$iku$1 AT vixen DOT cso DOT uiuc DOT edu> <5v76id$rn3 AT mozo DOT cc DOT purdue DOT edu> <5v7du5$38j AT bgtnsc02 DOT worldnet DOT att DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hdn88-067.hil.compuserve.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

Flavius DOT Vespasianus AT signature DOT below DOT d wrote:
> 
> In article <5v76id$rn3 AT mozo DOT cc DOT purdue DOT edu>, "Chris Lomont" <clomont AT omni DOT cc DOT purdue DOT edu> wrote:
> > db <*bowlin*@*uiuc.edu*> wrote in article
> ><5v5fm1$iku$1 AT vixen DOT cso DOT uiuc DOT edu>...
> >>1.)BC++ 5.02,Symantec C++ and Watcom C++ produce faster and smaller
> >>executables than MSVC++ 5.0.
> >
> >Please post some  references for these claims. The results I've heard so far
> >put MSVC 5.0 exe's faster and smaller than each of those other compilers.
> 
> This sort of comparison is generally bullshit. When people make claims like
> this
> 
> What is being tested?
> What compiler switches are being used?
> 
> Generally magazines run bogus compiler tests that compiler developers 
> to fake out.

They use pretty standard programs for compiler benchmarks. The vendor 
(Borland or Watcom for instance) is contacted for the best commandline 
setup to use etc.