From: "John M. Aldrich" <fighteer AT cs DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Watcom vs DJGPP
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 07:12:19 +0000
Organization: Two pounds of chaos and a pinch of salt
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <345ECAD3.28A9@cs.com>
References: <345DE302 DOT 3D77 AT trash DOT lip6 DOT fr>
Reply-To: fighteer AT cs DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp231.cs.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

Fabrice ILPONSE wrote:
> 
>         WATCOM can create DOS code but the editors are under windows!
>         WATCOM programs are faster than DJGPP ones!
>         Why?
>         I'm looking for the reason.
>         PS: the generated code of djgpp is certainly better than the watcom
> code.

Watcom, IIRC, generates 16-bit DOS code.  This will usually run faster
for small applications due to the reduced overhead.  Larger apps,
specifically those written to take advantage of 32-bit code, should run
significantly faster under DJGPP than under Watcom.

If you're talking about 32-bit DOS code generated by Watcom, then it
probably depends on the task at hand.  You'd have to post some specific
examples for us to be able to help.

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|      John M. Aldrich       | "Autocracy is based on the assumption|
|       aka Fighteer I       | that one man is wiser than a million |
|   mailto:fighteer AT cs DOT com   | men.  Let's play that over again,    |
| http://www.cs.com/fighteer | too.  Who decides?"   - Lazarus Long |
---------------------------------------------------------------------