Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!att!cbnewsc!tjr
From: tjr@cbnewsc.att.com (thomas.j.roberts)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: Borland C++ : Protected Mode faster??
Message-ID: <1991May23.155105.24435@cbnewsc.att.com>
Date: 23 May 91 15:51:05 GMT
References: <1991May22.210541.1@vax1.tcd.ie>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 28

From article <1991May22.210541.1@vax1.tcd.ie>, by mtynan@vax1.tcd.ie:
> 
> 
> I've heard rumours that the compile-link cycle time is greatly reduced
> when running Borland C++ in protected mode, is this true?
> 
> At the moment, running in real mode, it takes about 12 minutes to compile
> and link and link an 80 line windows .exe on my 16Mhz 286 machine.
> 
> Would the speed benifits of running in protected mode justify buying the
> extra 1MB of RAM I need?
> 
> I'd be grateful for any info anyone can offer!

I noticed that the biggest reduction in compile-time was due to using
precompiled headers - now error messages come out in 3-5 seconds on
my initial Windows program (~140 lines of C++). I have an AT&T 6386/SX
(16 MHz 386SX) with 2.0 Mb, and use bcx under windows in standard mode.
The entire compile/link/resource-compile sequence (ultimately successful)
takes ~ 30 sec.

My only problem is memory - with 2MB, I cannot reserve 640kb for tkernel,
run windows, run bcx, run the resource toolkit, AND run my test program.
The big memory hog is the resource toolkit (and windows, of course, and 
tkernel).

Tom Roberts
att!ihlpl!tjrob  TJROB@IHLPL.ATT.COM