> if you choose gcc, and with all the free utilities
> that come with it - you can do just as much as you
> can with CodeWarrior. if anything - i even think you
> can get better code from gcc.
don't make definitive statements like that based purely on your own
speculation.
gcc does not support apps greater than 32kb unless you do some fiddling with
a couple compiler information files. even after that, it cannot support
greater than 64kb, and realistically you'll start to have locality link
errors that are impossible to resolve starting somewhere around 56kb.
CW's debugger is MUCH better than gdb.
look around some more, read some objective comparisons. there's more to the
story than "free!" vs "what, i have to pay money for something?". it's kind
of silly to say that compilers should inherently be free. i'm not even
going to address that one.
gcc has no support. you have a problem? go read a book on compilers and
then fix the compiler. (yes, gcc has bugs).
> the m68k cross compiler in gcc has been around longer
> than CodeWarrior..
so?
> i had my doubts about gcc until i sat down and performed
> a little bit of RTFM.. (and looking at the code).. it
> pays to do this first.
yes, gcc works great for small projects. i don't use it anymore because CW
is significantly better. noone has to use CW, and i agree that for many
people, a free compiler is good enough. but free does not automatically ==
better. (and in this specific case, for serious or large code development,
gcc is not better).
by the way, do you intend to use floating point? have fun with gcc...
