Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!mtune!codas!usfvax2!chips
From: chips@usfvax2.UUCP (Chip Salzenberg)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Turbo C questions
Message-ID: <808@usfvax2.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 30-Jul-87 10:34:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: usfvax2.808
Posted: Thu Jul 30 10:34:05 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Aug-87 03:12:44 EDT
References: <572@rlgvax.UUCP>
Organization: AT Engineering, Tampa, FL
Lines: 30
Summary: Command line version (TCC) is reloaded for each module.

In article <572@rlgvax.UUCP>, cliff@rlgvax.UUCP writes:
> I've been using TurboC productively now for a few weeks, and have just
> taken the opportunity to examine the interactive environment.  Perhaps I'm
> missing something, but I really can't see the utility of it, especially
> since the editor is single window/buffer.
> 
> Can somebody reveal some advantage of tc over tcc and a good editor to me?
> 

TC's big advantage over TCC is this:

	The Compiler Is Always In Memory!

Using a MAKE program and TCC, the compiler is reloaded from disk once per .C
file.  Using Project Make in TC, the compiler stays in memory as it compiles
many modules.

I use TC on a VERY large program:  105 source files and 41 header files.
I compile and link all 105 modules with TC in exactly 30 minutes on a AT.
(No, they aren't tiny sources, either:  the .EXE is 367K without CodeView info.)
MS-C takes at least three times that long.

A hint:  If you have one header file which is #included by many source files in
a project, load that header into the editor before remaking the world.  TC is
smart enough to read from the editor workspace instead of the disk file, which
speeds up your compilation.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg            UUCP: "uunet!ateng!chip"  or  "chips@usfvax2.UUCP"
A.T. Engineering, Tampa    Fidonet: 137/42    CIS: 73717,366
"Use the Source, Luke!"    My opinions do not necessarily agree with anything.