🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul30.164712.202165@uctvax.uct.ac.za> brrian04@uctvax.uct.ac.za writes:
>Has anyone used both Borland C++ 3 and MS C++ 7?  I'm wondering how they
>compare.  Which is a better overall for writing both DOS and Windows code?
>Any information on these two products would be appreciated.  
>
>Thanks
>brrian04@uctvax.uct.ac.za

We have a couple of medium-sized programs we support here and one large
one.  Prior to upgrading to MS C/C++ 7 we had been using MSC 5.1 for
development.  There were two noticable improvements in the code built
with 7.0.

First, by using the /Gy function-level linking option (and changing no
other compile options) the executables were a bit smaller.  Actually 15%
smaller in the case of our DOS Wais client, because the code is built on
top of the generic wais distribution, and there are a *lot* of routines
in the various lower-level protocol modules that are never called by a
client -- they are used only by servers.  This reduced the executable
from 143K to 125K.  The others were not so dramatic, but were still more
compact.

Second, the text-mode screen handling routines in conio.h -- _textout(), 
_settextposition(), and _clearscreen() -- are a bit faster, making the
program appear to run faster, even if it really isn't.

I develop from the command line rather than use the Progammer's
Workbench, so I can't evaluate that.

Optimization seems to be a bit more reliable now than it was in 5.1.

Steve
-- 
+      +      +      +      +      +      +    |snewton@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu
         The map is the territory/             |Nobody else speaks for me,
       The map is not the territory.           |and I speak for no one else.
                                               |     +     +     +     +     +