Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-owner@sourceware.cygnus.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com Message-Id: <199904231525.KAA29319@modi.xraylith.wisc.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: modi.xraylith.wisc.edu: localhost.xraylith.wisc.edu [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: Aldo Mazzilli Cc: gnu-win32@cygnus.com Subject: Re: egcs vs gcc In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 23 Apr 1999 09:01:28 CDT." Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 10:25:45 -0500 From: Mumit Khan Mumit Khan writes: > On Fri, 23 Apr 1999, Aldo Mazzilli wrote: > > > > And, I have to choose the compiler between EGCS and GCC. > > I just want your advice concerning the best choose I can do between EGCS > > and GCC. > > > > My choose must depend on : > > - reexamination degree of the compiler > > - security degree of the compiler > > - efficiency of produced code > > - size of produced code > > Cygwin code is always going to be a bit less efficient that Mingw code > simply because of the emulation layer. Whether it's acceptable or not > depends on what your application does! For floating point intensive code, > Cygwin's math library provided by newlib is not that great, and you'll > get faster results (and fewer bugs) with MS runtime. Ahem, I should really answer the question asked instead of making one up ;-) My apologies. FSF GCC aka GCC2 is dead, and the development on it has ceased. If you wait a few days, you will see the announcement that EGCS is going to become the next generation of FSF GCC -- GCC3. *Do not* pick FSF GCC 2.8.x no matter what others may tell you. This is especially true on x86-win32 targets. Regards, Mumit -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com