Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!news.cs.indiana.edu!maytag!watstat.waterloo.edu!dmurdoch
From: dmurdoch@watstat.waterloo.edu (Duncan Murdoch)
Subject: Re: Turbo 5.5 vs 6.0
Message-ID: <1991Jun21.174924.86@maytag.waterloo.edu>
Sender: news@maytag.waterloo.edu (News Owner)
Organization: University of Waterloo
References: <9106210330.AA22569@lux.sait.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1991 17:49:24 GMT
Lines: 18

In article <9106210330.AA22569@lux.sait.edu.au> et891856@LUX.SAIT.EDU.AU (et891856) writes:
>At the moment I have Turbo 5.5.  is it worth my while upgrading to
>turbo 6.0.  Does it compile faster, produce faster code or does it
>just take up more disk space?  I have a twin floppy XT system.

On that hardware I would definitely *not* upgrade.  It isn't faster, on
an XT produces indetectably better code, but does take up a lot of space.
If you don't have a lot of EMS memory, you'll find the IDE unbearably slow,
because it does a lot of overlay swapping.  Doing that to floppy disk would be
horrible.

The main advantages of upgrading are to get the Turbovision library (but
the Object Windows library in TP for Windows is probably a smarter thing to
spend your time learning), and the inline assembler.  For most people, 
those just aren't worth it.

Duncan Murdoch
dmurdoch@watstat.waterloo.edu