Hi
Teo Fonrouge wrote:
>
> Seems that MSVC compilers create more compact and fastest code than
> the others compilers, and also seems that current MinGW builds (GCC >
> 4) are getting closer to MSVC results.
>
Here are some results of 3 compilers:
MSVC 2008
EXE SIZE: 6573 KB
DIFFERENCE: Links one external lib statically ( www.dosadi.com )
RUN: PASS1 6.75 Secs
PASS2 4.97 Secs
PASS3 5.00 Secs
BCC 5.5.1
EXE SIZE: 6706 KB
DIFFERENCE: Links one external lib dynamically pulled via implib
RUN: PASS1 5.72
PASS2 5.69
PASS3 5.63
MINGW
EXE SIZE: 8287 KB
DIFFERENCE: Does not include above lib, does not include 2 .prgs 1 .res
RUN: PASS1 4.48
PASS2 4.51
PASS3 4.53
All above runs are on the same execution, i.e., moves a browser first to
last with 1408 recs.
Personal observation:
* MINGW is the fastest though it has larger executable ( does not matter
).
* MINGW has the limitation not to allow more than 1 resource files (
really a shame ).
* MINGW is very tricky when you need Windows .dlls to be manipulated (
again a severe limit ).
* BCC is handy to include any external lib because of "implib" utility
but slowest of all.
So one's choice may be affected by many factors.
Suggesstion: go for MINGW if you never plan to include more than one .RES
file and
do not have to include external party Windows .DLLs without a MINGW
export by the author.
Regards
Pritpal Bedi
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/From-xHarbour-to-Harbour%3A-need-some-infos-tp26256686p26258143.html
Sent from the Harbour - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
