1. C/C++ compilers' speed
- Posted by rforno at tutopia.com
Jan 15, 2003
Does somebody know which of Micro$oft Visual C++, Borland C++ 5, Open Watcom
beta, etc. compilers generate faster code?
TIA
2. Re: C/C++ compilers' speed
- Posted by cgibin at bellsouth.net
Jan 15, 2003
Watcom is fastest with the largest generated .exe/.dlls
Borland is slightly slower and middle of the road in size.
LCC is fast but slower than Bor or Wat with the smallest generated .exe/dlls
I have made a request to eliminate unused imports
for console mode output in Windows GUI's (tranlator specific)
(a simple message box, your program error and line number)
would be great. this would eliminate alot of API that most
of us never use.
I guess I could go on all day bout this kind of stuff.
Unknown
----- Original Message -----
From: <rforno at tutopia.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 9:16 AM
Subject: C/C++ compilers' speed
> Does somebody know which of Micro$oft Visual C++, Borland C++ 5, Open Watcom
> beta, etc. compilers generate faster code?
> TIA
3. Re: C/C++ compilers' speed
- Posted by cgibin at bellsouth.net
Jan 16, 2003
Speed of generated code!
Watcom is fastest
Borland comes in second
and LCC third
My guess is that MSC++ would be slower simply because
C++ compilers usually generate slower code from the get-go.
just as I said earlier.
I write C code aswell, not just euphoria.
btw, I have the 2.3 interpreter source code running faster than the
(RDS) Watcom compiled version using LCC because Im using
more API instead of C-runtime functions but, thats another story.
Eum
----- Original Message -----
From: <rforno at tutopia.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 10:56 PM
Subject: RE: C/C++ compilers' speed
>
> Euman:
> I think maybe you misinterpreted my question. I was asking not about
> compilation speed, but about the speed of the generated code, and not
> specifically for EU translated to C.
> Also, does somebody know about Visual C++ speed in this aspect?
> Regards.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <cgibin at bellsouth.net>
> To: EUforum <EUforum at topica.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 11:00 AM
> Subject: Re: C/C++ compilers' speed
>
>
> > Watcom is fastest with the largest generated .exe/.dlls
> > Borland is slightly slower and middle of the road in size.
> > LCC is fast but slower than Bor or Wat with the smallest generated
> .exe/dlls
> >
> > I have made a request to eliminate unused imports
> > for console mode output in Windows GUI's (tranlator specific)
> > (a simple message box, your program error and line number)
> > would be great. this would eliminate alot of API that most
> > of us never use.
> >
> > I guess I could go on all day bout this kind of stuff.
> >
> > Unknown
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <rforno at tutopia.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 9:16 AM
> > Subject: C/C++ compilers' speed
> >
> > > Does somebody know which of Micro$oft Visual C++, Borland C++ 5, Open
> Watcom
> > > beta, etc. compilers generate faster code?
> > > TIA
> >
> >
> > TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
> >
>
>
>
> TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
>
