On 04 May 2010, at 15:07, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: > On 4 May 2010 14:12, Andrew Brunner <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> How is it possible that under *nix I'm able to live with the memory >> performance of 64bit FPC but cannot with Windows? > > This is the exact question I asked Florian, but he side-tracked the > answer. [or I haven't read a new reply yet].
"I did not get the answer I expected" is not the same as "he side-tracked the question". He said a) we distribute native i386 and x86-64 Linux versions because it is not always trivial to use i386 binaries on a 64 bit Linux distribution. The reason for the separate distributions has nothing to do with speed. b) we only distribute an i386->x86-64 cross-compiler because on Windows the problem that exists under Linux does not exist, and there is no advantage to having a native x86-64 Windows compiler (at best it will be just as fast as a i386->x86-64 cross-compiler, and at worst it will be slower) The above is a correct and full answer to the question why we distribute a native x86-64 compiler for Linux even if it is believed to be slower than an i386->x86-64 cross-compiler, and why we do not do this for Linux. Jonas_______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - [email protected] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
