mark@intek01.UUCP (Mark McWiggins) (08/11/89)
grg@otter.hpl.hp.com (Gerd Groos) writes: >Looks like you get more performance for less money using a >product like Zortech C++. >Why do people then use C++ translators on MS-DOS machines? (1) Until C++ compilers get here in force, a translator gives you a few more options in the way of code generation, etc. You can generate 386 native binaries with a C++ translator whose generated C you then pass through a 386-native C compiler. With Zortech you're stuck with whatever code the makers set you up with, namely 8088 at this point. (2) This may not apply today, but early versions of Zortech were seriously broken. I do expect that as more vendors (especially Borland and Microsoft) introduce native-code C++ compilers, The Translator will tend to be less used except for niche markets (cross-compilation to special-purpose chips, etc.). I work for an MS-DOS C++ translator vendor, so I could well be prejudiced on any or all of these points. -- Mark McWiggins Integration Technologies, Inc. (Intek) +1 206 455 9935 DISCLAIMER: I could be wrong ... 1400 112th Ave SE #202 Bellevue WA 98004 uunet!intek01!mark Ask me about C++!