Re: Version Question

[ByteSavers International <cerise@geocities.com>]

At 01:50 PM 11/8/99 -0500, you wrote:
>On Mon, 8 Nov 1999, ByteSavers International wrote:
>
>>     GCC/EGCS is fine and dandy, but last I checked they weren't even POSIX.
>> Borland C++ Builder, that or Watcom is the only way to go.
>
>	Is Borland C++ Builder anything like Delphi?  I don't know exactly
>what POSIX means (I always thought it meant Platform Operating System
>resembling Unix), but I thought that it only applied to operating systems,
>not software.  I also heard that one of the main requirements for POSIX
>was that it support some variety of bourne/unix shell and the basic Unix
>suite of command-line utilities.  In any case, if C++ Builder is anything
>like Delphi, then it has a RAD environment and a proprietary project
>format and isn't available on any platform other than Windows, which
>sucks (although RAD is a great way to build applications).  But I don't
>know if C++ Builder is anything like Delphi in that respect.

   BC++ Build is just an advanced development environment for the various
platforms.  It has all sorts of Win32 API functions, and specializes in making
a good, clean front end for your program.  
   Making your own browser becomes almost reasonable with Builder 8)
   POSIX is just the standards set on UNIX and the rest of them for
Interoperability
(your missing I ;) ).  It aims at keeping UNIX, the GNU project, etc honest
to it's
mainframe and C roots.
   BC++ does have it's own proprietary schtuff, but what doesn't?
   As for POSIX certification, a shell (command interpreter) is a
requirement, although
I'm not certain if it centers around the Bourne shell in particular.  I'd
tend to say it
doesn't.  At any rate, you can look around and find the exact proposals.

>	However, I have found GCC/EGCS to be the most cross-platform
>compiler I've ever used (I've never used Codewarrior, but I'm guessing
>this is the only compiler that would really surpass it), simply because
>there's a port of it on nearly every platform, and it conforms very
>closely to the ANSI C/C++ standards.

   I've never cared for Codewarrior.
   GCC/EGCS are good compilers, but my understanding is that the handling
of memory allocation and graphics tend to be off standard.  For good or bad?
That I don't know.

>	Of course, you could probably just compile with whatever compiler
>is most supported for the given platform--that's what I'm doing, compiling
>the win32 port of my software under MSVC++ and the Linux port under
>GCC/EGCS.  I just don't think that Borland C++ and Watcom are the "only"
>ways to go, especially when they're only available for Windows. :)

   Borland C++ and Watcom offer portability and the ability to compile for other
platforms.

>>     And Wing, we COULD go back to machine code 8)  That'll let ya know for
>> certain.  Optimizing compilers aren't bad, but they don't squish code as
>> well as a well-trained eye/hand coordinating.
>
>	Actually, in some cases they do it much better.  For instance,
>in certain cases LISP can compile its code to run even faster than most
>hand-written optimized assembly because it's taking your high-level code
>and converting it to machine code in very complex yet very efficient ways
>that you'd probably never think of.  Basically what I mean to say is that
>when you program in a high-level language, the compiler can notice certain
>high-level patterns in your code (which wouldn't be visible to the
>compiler in low-level languages) and use VERY complex optimizations when
>converting the code to machine language.

    My experience has been that I can reduce the code down by about 2/3s.  It's
funny that you mention LISP because the compiler's I've used have actually been
the WORST among them.  There is no optimizing compiler, like I said, that
can massage
code like a good eye.  They're not bad, but they still aren't great.

-Phil/CERisE
SomeOtherPerson: we have no cheese in the house!  
SomeOtherPerson: err..we do, but it's non-fat tasteless garbage
CERisE8192: Well that's because you're pathetic weight-watchers ;)
SomeOtherPerson: it almost ruined my sunday night...

6:20-ish 10/18/99

=================================================================
The GameProgrammer.Com mailing list is for the open discussion
of any topic related to the art, science, and business of
programming games. This list is especially tolerant of beginners.
We were all beginners once

To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE please visit:
http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html