On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Steven Hirsch wrote:
lyricalnanoha wrote:On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, apple2freak@gmail.com wrote:Why would Intel make a C/C++ compiler for their hardware if the GNU compiler was already good enough? Again, common sense dictates that they would only produce one if it could significantly outperform the GNU compiler, which it generally does.That's because GCC is a sluggish, bloated mess.We use gcc/g++ to build high-performance applications for VLSI design verification. The Intel compiler was not enough fast to justify the price, FWIW.What is _that_ comment based upon?
It's really true of ALL the Gnu stuff. It might be effective at doing its job but it's slow and bloated.
It's the main reason I prefer the BSD tools, although they haven't yet managed to cough up a gcc replacement that works well enough for real use. When I code for DOS, however, I avoid using GCC unless I really have no other choice (this is why a lot of my stuff has been 16-bit even though it hasn't had to be).
-uso.