From: Erwann ABALEA <eabalea AT certplus DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Is djgpp really THAT inefficient?
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:27:26 +0100
Organization: Certplus SA
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.05.9902101125080.24600-100000@fermi.cnam.fr>
References: <79rkla$v6a$1 AT ultra DOT sonic DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fermi.cnam.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: abalea_e AT fermi DOT cnam DOT fr
In-Reply-To: <79rkla$v6a$1@ultra.sonic.net>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On 10 Feb 1999, Hoang Huynh wrote:

> Okay, I am a newbie taking a newbie
> CIS class and came upon something
> that perplexes me: 
> 
> I wrote this little program and
> compiled it using both DJGPP (with
> RHIDE) and Borland Turbo C v3.0.
> With DJGPP, the .exe came out to
> be about 300KB while with the Borland
> TC, the .exe was 50K (!).

Just run 'strip yourfile.exe', and you'll see it's size reduced...

But still larger than the Borland's result.

You have also to know the fact that your program compiled under DJGPP will
run in protected mode, and will be able to use all your memory (even more,
using swap file)... With Borland's Turbo C 3, you'll only be able to use
what's remaining in the low 640KB...

-- 
Erwann ABALEA
eabalea AT certplus DOT com