On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 04:59, Jason House <jason.james.ho...@gmail.com> wrote: > I always recommend cygwin. I'm a linux guy and can't live without all my > little tools and simple package installation. You should be able to get the > exact gcc libego was optimized for that way.
I forgot about cygwin indeed. It is a good idea. But can you ran the binary on a system without cygwin? > > I use the digital mars d compiler and it's blazingly fast. All my d files > can compile and link faster than gcc compiles one of libego's c++ files. I'm > not knocking libego, just giving a relevent reference point. I'm using > libego under the hood for playouts. the reason of slow libego compilation is conntected to speed of playouts. It has everything in one file optimized with O3. After compilation there are almost no functions calls. Lukasz > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Apr 20, 2009, at 9:18 PM, Michael Williams <michaelwilliam...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I got Libego compiled to a Windows DLL using Visual Studio and was able to >> call it, but I was only getting around 5k pps on my Core2. So I wanted to >> try another compiler. Has anyone used the Digital Mars C++ compiler? Or is >> there another compiler I should try? >> _______________________________________________ >> computer-go mailing list >> computer-go@computer-go.org >> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
