#pragma comment (lib, ...)

Paulo Pinto pjmlp at progtools.org
Thu Oct 11 02:47:18 PDT 2012


On Thursday, 11 October 2012 at 07:18:45 UTC, Arjan wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 16:32:05 +0200, Paulo Pinto 
> <pjmlp at progtools.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 14:44:20 UTC, Walter Bright 
>> wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2012 4:49 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, 10 October 2012 at 11:50:29 UTC, Manu wrote:
>>>>> Really? Is it an MS thing? I'm amazed the other compilers 
>>>>> haven't adopted
>>>>> that in the last 10 years or whatever.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it is a Microsoft extension. I never saw it in any 
>>>> other C or C++ compiler.
>>>
>>> Digital Mars C and C++ !!
>>
>> I only became aware of Digital Mars thanks to D, I must 
>> confess.
>>
>> When I moved away from Turbo Pascal, I started using Turbo C 
>> and Turbo C++, followed by Borland C++ and eventually Visual 
>> C++.
>>
>> Then at the university I started to use vendor's C and C++ 
>> compilers of the multiple UNIX systems we had access to.
>>
>> I used to see adverts for Watcom C/C++, High C/C++ and Zortech 
>> C/C++ in computer magazines, but never knew anyone that had 
>> access to them.
>>
>
> You really missed something. For years 
> Zortech/Sysmantec/DigitalMars C++ has been my preferred 
> compiler. Generated fast code very fast! With being STLport'ed 
> it also had decent support for STL. It often times barked about 
> issues with Type checking other compilers did not even mention. 
> Which saved me from quite a few bugs.
> When porting big C++ libraries like wxWidgets (then wxWindows) 
> it became apparent to me DMC++ did need the least special 
> treatment to make it compile the code. Also ported various 
> Boost libs to it.
> It wasn't util VS2005 came along before I started shifting 
> away...
>
> About Watcom? Well a complete opposite experience...
>
> Arjan

I guess the Portuguese market was too small for having those 
compilers available.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list