They're the same as in linux, except not widely supported. All
applications built with DJGPP 2.04+ support them.
On 1/30/07, Alain M. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Blair Campbell escreveu:
> >> What about Blair's RTL? and it also has LFN...
> > And symlinks :-)
>
> What are symlinks in DOS? I
Blair Campbell escreveu:
>> What about Blair's RTL? and it also has LFN...
> And symlinks :-)
What are symlinks in DOS? I know of them in Linux, and as part of the OS
not the RTL...
Alain
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influ
On 1/19/07, Alain M. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Arkady V.Belousov escreveu:
> > For applications, RTL usually is inherent part, so comparing RTLs
> > (which also compiled by compilers) together _is_ relevant. On the other
> > side, given examples make bias point - you may now enough to b
Arkady V.Belousov escreveu:
> For applications, RTL usually is inherent part, so comparing RTLs
> (which also compiled by compilers) together _is_ relevant. On the other
> side, given examples make bias point - you may now enough to bias executable
> size and compare resulting sizes, not ins
>
> How much?
MS VC is 6% "better" than OW, both optimizing for size. OW is not bad,
especially if comparing MSVC with TC, where MSVC is 25% "better".
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceF
Hi!
19-Янв-2007 15:09 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Japheth) wrote to
freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net:
>> May you show examples? Starting from minimal "void main(){}", then with
>> printf("Hello, world!\n"), then something more complex? With OW 1.6:
J> a "dummy" main and a "hello world" main are utt
Hi Arkady,
[PS: I am still looking for people who can help with
reviewing my 2035c versus 2036 diff report, thanks!]
>> type test1.c
> void main () {}
>> wcl test1.c
>> wcc TEST1.C
>> wlink @__wcl__.lnk
>> type test2.c
> #include
> void main () { printf ("Hello, world!\n"); }
...
> TEST1EXE
Hello Japheth,
>> May you show examples? Starting from minimal "void main(){}", then with
>> printf("Hello, world!\n"), then something more complex? With OW 1.6:
> a "dummy" main and a "hello world" main are utterly irrelevant if you want to
> compare size/speed optimisations (leaving CRT as
>
> May you show examples? Starting from minimal "void main(){}", then with
> printf("Hello, world!\n"), then something more complex? With OW 1.6:
a "dummy" main and a "hello world" main are utterly irrelevant if you want to
compare size/speed optimisations (leaving CRT aside).
A "complex"
Hi!
18-Янв-2007 11:31 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Japheth) wrote to
freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net:
>> Better than watcom? How much better and in which areas?
J> In Open Watcom just the 32bit C(++) compiler and WD are pretty good. The rest
J> is of "mixed" quality.
J> With optimisation on MSVC CL
> Better than watcom? How much better and in which areas?
In Open Watcom just the 32bit C(++) compiler and WD are pretty good. The rest
is of "mixed" quality.
With optimisation on MSVC CL.EXE beats OW WCC.EXE significantly both in speed
and binary size (not counting the CRT part).
One re
Norbert Remmel wrote:
> is there anyone out there who still owns an early Microsoft C compiler
> which can be run under plain DOS?
May be you can use DJGPP: http://www.delorie.com/
Guillermo "Ñuño" Martínez
-
Take Surveys
"Arkady V.Belousov" wrote:
> Better than watcom? How much better and in which areas?
MS Visual C++ 1.5x can successfully compile 4DOS sources. ;-)
A note from http://www.4dos.hit.bg/: '"Porting" to another compiler will
be hard to do as the _TEXT segment is almost full and all the other
com
Hi!
17-Янв-2007 17:26 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Japheth) wrote to
freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net:
J> I own MS VC 1.5 which runs in DOS with the Phar Lab TNT DOS Extender.
J> IMO it is the best 16-bit C(++) optimising compiler :)
Better than watcom? How much better and in which areas?
---
Norbert Remmel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is there anyone out there who still owns an early Microsoft C compiler
> which can be run under plain DOS?
>
> Regards
>
> Norbert.
>
> -
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
>
DeSmet C is actually quite different than any of the other DOS
compilers available. I would not recommend it if you are trying to
compile existing source code, becuase its standard library lacks many
of the extensions that DOS programmers (and even POSIX programmers)
take for granted, like open().
I own MS VC 1.5 which runs in DOS with the Phar Lab TNT DOS Extender.
IMO it is the best 16-bit C(++) optimising compiler :)
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and yo
Norbert Remmel wrote:
> is there anyone out there who still owns an early Microsoft C compiler
> which can be run under plain DOS?
If no one has an early Microsoft C compiler maybe
http://www.desmet-c.com/ could help in some way. Good luck.
-
Hi,
is there anyone out there who still owns an early Microsoft C compiler
which can be run under plain DOS?
Regards
Norbert.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and y
19 matches
Mail list logo
