Re: Translating Euphoria Apps -- Which compiler do you use?
- Posted by jeremy (admin) Aug 17, 2008
- 1308 views
Borland, Watcom and MSVC are faster than MinGW. I do not have any hard facts.
I took this quite personally.
So, I took eu 4.0 and ported it to compile under MinGW (with as high a level of optimization as I know how to do). The result: allsorts.ex claims equal speed for MinGW exu.exe vs OpenWatcom exw.exe (in some cases, OpenWatcom is faster by a few hundreths of a second. In other cases, MinGW is faster by a few hundreths of a second).
This is good news. I didn't go to the point of porting Eu. They were C benchmarks mainly from the great computer language shootout. It's possible the latest version of MinGW addresses some of the speed issues or that the speed issues show up mainly in loops, computations, recursive calling. The slowdown of MinGW is very well documented all over the net but I know for those reasons they have been working on it as well.
So, over all, what does this mean? Is MinGW easier to install or more popular than OpenWatcom? It seems it may be easier to maintain than OpenWatcom as MinGW is simply GCC for windows and we already have to maintain GCC for Linux/FreeBSD/OS X.
Maybe we should add MinGW to the mix and see what happens?
Jeremy
