Linux MolBio Software

Walter Rothe aimania at airmail.net
Thu Mar 28 17:42:59 EST 1996

bernard at elsie.nci.nih.gov (Bernard Murray) wrote:

>In article <4ivauu$oda at news-f.iadfw.net>, aimania at airmail.net says...
>>mangalam at uci.edu (Harry Mangalam) wrote:
>>>(altho, some would say that GNU is better than commercial quality :)

>>I've used both GNU C and Microsoft Visual C++ and although GNU C was
>>faster than Microsoft when they only had a 16 bit version, Microsoft
>>is now faster than GNU C and there debugger is unbelievable.

>I don't see the relevance.
>MS VC++ will not run on a Linux/unix box.  This is the prime
>consideration.  Its not just gcc that is the item under
>consideration but also the operating system, X-windows etc.
I am not suggesting that gcc is not useful. I applaud the Free
Software Foundation for its work. I was correcting a falsehood that
gcc compiles the fastest code. 

>Also, MS C++ is far from being freeware and is much less debugged
>than gcc (even MS admit this, they "unofficially" debug things after
>they have sold them) so I'm not sure that I'd trust it just yet and
>I don't have the cash to spare for the "upgrades" that will be
>necessary as their operating systems change.
I don't have enough experience to judge how well debugged the gcc
compiler is, but I have used a couple of Amiga commercial compilers
and Microsoft Visual C++ is alot better debugged than what I saw
>	GNU is here to stay, MS could change direction completely
>tomorrow so code written for gcc should always work.  If generous
>people hand out scientific software written in nice code then I've
>also no need of a debugger, no matter how unbelievable.  On the
>other hand, if the same generous people make executables for DOS/Win
>or whatever available I don't really care what compiler they've used
>as I don't have to compile it myself (even if slowly).
>	I believe that the comment in the original post referred to
>gcc versus "native" cc.

>		Bernard
I don't inherently mistrust large corporations. Microsoft works hard
updating their compiler with more user friendly environments, tools,
etc. and they have even taken a suggestion I gave them on how to
improve their compiler. If you are developing new code, that will work
on PC, Mac, Alpha, and MIPS, Visual C++ will impress you.

Note that I do not have any affiliation with Microsoft, I just like
their product.

>Bernard Murray, Ph.D.
>bernard at elsie.nci.nih.gov  (National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda MD, USA)

Walter Rothe aimania at airmail.net

More information about the Bio-soft mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net