1. 2.5 Translator, C Compilers Supported
When I had a dial-up connection the small size of Lccwin32 was
was important and its compilation speed has always been welcome.
But it is free only for personal use--if you use it at work or
sell programs compiled with it you are required to buy a
professional version at 50 euros or so.
If Rob wants to simplify the Windows distribution to include
libraries only for Open Watcom 1.3+, I would have no objection.
2. Re: 2.5 Translator, C Compilers Supported
ken Roger wrote:
> When I had a dial-up connection the small size of Lccwin32 was
> was important and its compilation speed has always been welcome.
> But it is free only for personal use--if you use it at work or
> sell programs compiled with it you are required to buy a
> professional version at 50 euros or so.
>
> If Rob wants to simplify the Windows distribution to include
> libraries only for Open Watcom 1.3+, I would have no objection.
I seriously considering dropping support for Lcc, since
I support Watcom and Borland, and Lcc has bugs,
but I left it in since it doesn't really cost much to
keep it going. Maybe one day they'll get it working better.
I believe you can at least compile/run sanity.ex with it,
but larger Windows programs are likely to bomb due to
code generation bugs.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
3. Re: 2.5 Translator, C Compilers Supported
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> ken Roger wrote:
> > When I had a dial-up connection the small size of Lccwin32 was
> > was important and its compilation speed has always been welcome.
> > But it is free only for personal use--if you use it at work or
> > sell programs compiled with it you are required to buy a
> > professional version at 50 euros or so.
> >
> > If Rob wants to simplify the Windows distribution to include
> > libraries only for Open Watcom 1.3+, I would have no objection.
>
> I seriously considered dropping support for Lcc, since
> I support Watcom and Borland, and Lcc has bugs,
> but I left it in since it doesn't really cost much to
> keep it going. Maybe one day they'll get it working better.
> I believe you can at least compile/run sanity.ex with it,
> but larger Windows programs are likely to bomb due to
> code generation bugs.
>
I translated my contest entry, and interestingly, it ran quite a bit
(about 25%) faster when compiled with Borland than with Watcom.
Matt Lewis
