Re: c compilation - gcc vs visual c

Chris H wrote:
> In message <g02blv$63d$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, jacob navia <jacob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
writes
>>
>> It is not surprising that gcc is slower than Microsoft since the
>> people behind each project have vastly different objectives and
>> budgets to implement them.
>>
>> Gcc is running in many platforms and architectures.
>> Microsoft is running in one platform exclusively.
> 
> So  Gcc is not likely to be good on any platform as the people who 
> develop for other platforms will specialise in that and beat GCC?
> 

This is very likely indeed. A specialized compiler for a given platform
has less problems and can take advantage of many particular 
optimizations that a more general purpose compiler can't use.

> 
>> Gcc implements standards like C99
> CRAP
> 
> GCC implements GNU-c and adds extensions for SOME parts of C99
> 

Apparently you can't just say

"I disagree". No. You have to yell

CRAP!!!

Obviously you are right with "Some parts of C99" but those "some parts"
are almost 99% of the job...


>> (module small problems), Microsoft
>> implements only Microsoft  environments (.net, etc). Microsoft is
>> still at C89 level.
> 
> Microsoft along with every other compiler INCLUDING GCC is at C95  with 
> SOME parts of C99 implemented.
>

I disagree. Microsoft has done no effort at all to implemnt C99. The only
parts they did was // comments and accepting "long long". I am not aware 
of any other parts of C99 that they implement.



> GCC is no more C99 than any other compiler.
> 

It is more advanced in its implementation of C99 than lcc-win.


-- 
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32