X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f From: eplmst AT lu DOT erisoft DOT se (Martin Stromberg) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: djgpp vs MS VC++ 6.0 Date: 16 Apr 2002 15:44:34 GMT Organization: Ericsson Erisoft AB, Sweden Lines: 38 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lws256.lu.erisoft.se X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Bryan Parkoff (BParkoff AT satx DOT rr DOT com) wrote: : djgpp vs MS VC++ 6.0 : It is very important that I have to understand how C/C++ is organized : for the type of compiler. Borland C/C++ provides functions in real mode DOS : 16, but Djgpp provides functions in real mode DOS 32. Both Borland and There is no real mode DOZE 32. There is DOZE (16-bit) and 32-bit applications that run in protected mode which can call on DOZE (16-bit) services with the help of a server. In DJGPP's case it's a DPMI server. : Djgpp use their own STL. MS VC 6.0 uses MFC for Windows programming. We do? : I am concerned that Djgpp is might not designed to write X-Windows : programming that it is independment outside of Windows. Is it the reason : that Djgpp might be easier to develop software in real mode MS-DOS (32-Bit) : before it can be ported to Linux/Unix? Well, Microsnoft's software is certainly not designed to write X-Windows programs. If you use DJGPP it will be easier to port them to Linux compared to if you use Visual C++++. : Do you advise that I should use Djgpp rather than MS VC 6.0? Is it : because it is very flexible and independment without Microsoft push all of : us to move to MS VC++ 6.0 and/or MS VC# 7.0. I appreciate that you are : willing to provide the information that I need to know. Please advise. Well, in this forum you'd probably be advised to stick with DJGPP... Right, MartinS