Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 10:56:46 +0200 (MET DST) From: Jan Hubicka To: Paul Hsieh cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: The numer 1 compiler, DJGPP or MSVC Here's a good rating comparision In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Precedence: bulk > Why do people constantly follow this incorrect line of reasoning? Quake > II, like Quake and DOOM before it, is bottlenecked behind graphics > performance which is dealt with entirely in assembly language. In DOOM > they were two very small assembly routines, in Quake it was significantly > more. Their choice of C compiler was dictated by factors *other* than > compiler code generation performance, because they are never caught > behind compiler bottlenecks in the first place! This is probably true. I am making program XaoS (wich is realtime fractal zoomer) and it is completly coded in C and speed is really significant. I found GCC as the best compiler for that (I done tests at Watcom, VC, Borland etc) and GCC won, at least in FP mset calcualtion loop it seems to be best optimizing compiler around (and egcs (pre-gcc3.0) got another 30% speedup) So I don't think that GCC generates ugly code. See Borland one instead :) Honza > > -- > Paul Hsieh > http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/9498/mailme.html > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Have you browsed my www pages? Look at: http://www.paru.cas.cz/~hubicka Koules-the game for Svgalib,X11 and OS/2, Xonix-the game for X11 czech documentation for linux index, original 2D computer art and funny 100 years old photos and articles are there!