Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 12:17:00 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Herman Geza <geza AT inf DOT bme DOT hu>
cc: Cesar Scarpini Rabak <csrabak AT dce03 DOT ipt DOT br>,
        Fabrice ILPONSE <fabrice AT asim DOT lip6 DOT fr>,
        djgpp users group <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: Watcom vs DJGPP
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.971104164931.22372B-100000@kempelen.inf.bme.hu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.971105121642.460O-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 4 Nov 1997, Herman Geza wrote:

> 	It's a fact. I tried 7 programs, and WATCOM ones ran faster
> 	than DJGPP ones( the src code are the same ). Not much, about 4%.
> 	DJGPP's codes have never been faster than WATCOM's ones.

Was that on a Pentium?  If so, it's most probably because current
version of DJGPP doesn't support Pentium-specific optimizations while
Watcom does.  Try compiling those programs with PGCC, and compare
again.

(And who cares about 4% difference, anyway?)