kroe@sbcs.sunysb.edu (KiYun Roe) (01/09/91)
Could anyone please tell me if there is any difference in compilation speed between TurboC 2.0 and TurboC++ when compiling C code using the command-line versions of the compilers? I'm thinking of upgrading from TurboC Pro to TurboC++ Pro, but I only have an XT level system. I don't want the make process to become appreciably slower. While I'm at it, is there any significant difference between TD 1.0 and TD 2.0 other than reverse execution? Does TD 2.0 continue to work well from the keyboard without a mouse? Thanks. -- KiYun Roe kroe@sbcs.sunysb.edu Department of Computer Science SUNY at Stony Brook Stony Brook, NY 11794-4400 (516) 632-7675
rschmidt@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (roy schmidt) (01/10/91)
In article <1991Jan9.131031.21220@sbcs.sunysb.edu> kroe@sbcs.sunysb.edu (KiYun Roe) writes: > >While I'm at it, is there any significant difference between TD 1.0 and >TD 2.0 other than reverse execution? Does TD 2.0 continue to work well >from the keyboard without a mouse? > TD 2.0 works fine with and without the mouse. It has a much improved, context-sensitive menu system, so you don't need to plow through so many menus to get what you want. In some cases you can begin typing input, and TD will automatically open the input window you need! Of course, TD 2.0 is also smart for OOP, so you can debug TC++ and more recent TPascal programs using objects, classes, etc. Finally, TD 2.0 supports debugging TSRs and device drivers (!). I didn't do a runoff between the two compilers (TC 2.0 and TC++) for compilation speed. IMHO, I think this would splitting hairs. The more important points are adherence to ANSI C, library support, and code optimization. Saving even one minute in compile time is just not heart- stirring for me :-). -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roy Schmidt | #include <disclaimer.h> Indiana University | /* They are _my_ thoughts, and you can't Graduate School of Business | have them, so there! */
ho@hoss.unl.edu (Tiny Bubbles...) (01/10/91)
In <1991Jan9.131031.21220@sbcs.sunysb.edu> kroe@sbcs.sunysb.edu (KiYun Roe) writes: >speed between TurboC 2.0 and TurboC++ when compiling C code using the >command-line versions of the compilers? I'm thinking of upgrading from >TurboC Pro to TurboC++ Pro, but I only have an XT level system. I I want to know, too. My main reason is this: there was some patch info for TC++ 1.01 that was circulating earlier -- I believe it was a Borland "patch list" for the bug-fix release -- which alluded to "improving performance on 286 systems." That sounds pretty scary for us. If they're trying to make it bearable on a *286*, imagine how it would feel on our humble XT's... -- ... Michael Ho, University of Nebraska Internet: ho@hoss.unl.edu | "Mine... is the last voice that you will ever hear." Disclaimer: Peons don't speak for bigwigs.
jwbirdsa@amc-gw.amc.com (James Birdsall) (01/10/91)
In article <1991Jan9.131031.21220@sbcs.sunysb.edu> kroe@sbcs.sunysb.edu (KiYun Roe) writes: >While I'm at it, is there any significant difference between TD 1.0 and >TD 2.0 other than reverse execution? Does TD 2.0 continue to work well >from the keyboard without a mouse? TD 2.0 has suffered the same Mac-ification process that produced the TC++ IDE, etc. It is now crawling with dialog boxes, radio buttons, etc. Execution speed is substantially slower, but still adequate (even on my 4.77 MHz XT). On the other hand, a full keyboard interface is supported and works fine once you get the hang of it, and some of the history lists in the dialog boxes are quite useful. I use mine with mouse support turned off, and have had no troubles. Reverse execution is not a panacea. If you step over a function call and find your variables munged on the other side, it is unlikely that you will be able to back up -- I have never found a function for which this was possible. It is usually only possible to back up over "simple" statements, such as assignments, arithmetic, etc. This is because more complicated things, such as input or output, are not reversible. So most of the processes complicated enough to be interesting aren't reversible. On the other hand, it allowed me to step back and forth over a series of "simple" statements until I figured out why a variable on the far side of the universe was suddenly changing... -- James W. Birdsall WORK: jwbirdsa@amc.com {uunet,uw-coco}!amc-gw!jwbirdsa HOME: {uunet,uw-coco}!amc-gw!picarefy!jwbirdsa OTHER: 71261.1731@compuserve.com "The OS shouldn't die every time the controller drools on a sector." -- a sysop =========== "For it is the doom of men that they forget." -- Merlin ===========