Author: Tony Werten
Date: 13:22:10 08/04/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 2002 at 09:09:39, Bas Hamstra wrote: >On August 03, 2002 at 15:12:49, Tony Werten wrote: > >>On August 03, 2002 at 15:01:03, Dave Kuntzsch wrote: >> >>>Well, I've been hanging around here for some time now and have decided to >>>convert and continue developing a program written in assembler many years ago >>>for a Z80 cpu. I'm ready to pop for a C or C++ compiler and believe either the >>>MS or Intel versions would probably be best. My criteria are ease of use, >>>efficiency of compiled code, development tools, and vendor update support. I >>>expect that my processor will always be Intel based, but I would like to have >>>the option to optimize for processor manufacturer and family. I currently have >>>no experience with C or C++, but do in several other languages. One other >>>question: Do I need a separate assembler to handle inline assembly code with >>>these compilers? Any thoughts are appreciated. Thanks. >> >>Depends on what experience you have. Is it Pascal then easiest is to use Delphi. >>The difference is marginal (or non-existant) compared to C(++) >> >>Most modern compilers have a build-in assembler to handle inline asm. >> >>Tony > >Ho stop! I use C++ Builder, which is I think the same speed as Delphi. When I >compile at MS Visual C++ my executable is typically 25-30% faster. Not exactly >marginal... The VC++ compiler can be optimised easier by just flags. In Borland it has to be done by code. A bit more work but a lot safer, since the optimizer will not do unsafe optimisations. Tony > > >Bas. > > > >>> >>>Dave
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.