On Wed, 27 May 2009, Mindaugas Kavaliauskas wrote: Hi,
>> But then I created windows binaries of speedtst.exe for both compilers >> also compiled with -gc2: >> 1) BCC: >> size: 600576 >> execution time: 33.38 / 33.60 >> 2) MinGW: >> size: 882688 (striped) >> execution time: 21.99 / 22.15 >> So BCC gives ~50 worse results. >> Interesting that in your case the difference is smaller. >> If it's possible and you agree I would like to send you my binaries >> so we can compare results in real windows also with your previous >> ones from MinGW-GCC4.4.0 builds. > Yes, of cause, please send me. Thank you, binaries in attachment sent to your private mail. Please inform me if you received them. > It's also strange we get different exe size > for the same BCC compiler, it seems some compile options ar source versions > is a little different. What is your BCC version? I use: > Borland C++ 5.5.1 for Win32 Copyright (c) 1993, 2000 Borland I use the same but the size difference is probably caused by -gc2 option I used to compile Harbour core code and also speedtst.prg To make your result comparable you should also rebuild Harbour with: set HB_USER_PRGFLAGS=-gc2 and compile speedtst.prg with -gc[0-2] not -gc3. I'm interesting also in comparison between GCC-3.4.5 and 4.4.0 in MinGW. best regards, Przemek _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list [email protected] http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
