So,this problem is described below:
On the same PC(Under MS-DOS 6.0),Turbo Pascal 7.0 compiles the source
much faster than FreePascal does. The source of the program is very
simple,including 3 lines:) only to print a string on the screen.

What's the biggest difference between FP 1 and TP7.0?

On 2003-12-09, ZZhang <wsxs850@yahoo.com.cn> wrote:
> So,this problem is described below:
> On the same PC(Under MS-DOS 6.0),Turbo Pascal 7.0 compiles the source
> much faster than FreePascal does. The source of the program is very
> simple,including 3 lines:) only to print a string on the screen.
>
> What's the biggest difference between FP 1 and TP7.0?

(I assume you mean speed under plain dos ?)

- FPC is 32-bit bit -> needs extra handling to access dos, since dos is
	not 32-bits per se.
- FPC is written in itself to keep it maintainable. TP is in asm. Fast,
       but maintenance nightmare.
- FPC uses an external (GNU) party linker. This is probably the main reason.

On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 22:37:32 +0800, ZZhang <wsxs850@yahoo.com.cn>
wrote:

>On the same PC(Under MS-DOS 6.0),Turbo Pascal 7.0 compiles the source
>much faster than FreePascal does. 

Turbo Pascal (and Delphi, its successor) has always been a very fast
compiler.  It is the fastest one for a PC that I've ever seen.

Jud McCranie <j.mccranieNOSPAMMM@adelphia.net> wrote in message news:<0b2ctvsihj4b133dlb8npm0veq9ca3bs3l@4ax.com>...
> On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 22:37:32 +0800, ZZhang <wsxs850@yahoo.com.cn>
> wrote:
> 
> >On the same PC(Under MS-DOS 6.0),Turbo Pascal 7.0 compiles the source
> >much faster than FreePascal does. 
> 
> Turbo Pascal (and Delphi, its successor) has always been a very fast
> compiler.  It is the fastest one for a PC that I've ever seen.

Except for Delphi 7 which is kinda slower that the previous ones... I
like D5 more than D7, concerning compilation-time.

But I got no problem with my old TP7... It's one of the fastest
compilers I've ever seen...

Marco van de Voort <marcov@stack.nl> wrote in message news:<slrnbtbuhf.rqg.marcov@toad.stack.nl>...
> On 2003-12-09, ZZhang <wsxs850@yahoo.com.cn> wrote:
> > So,this problem is described below:
> > On the same PC(Under MS-DOS 6.0),Turbo Pascal 7.0 compiles the source
> > much faster than FreePascal does. The source of the program is very
> > simple,including 3 lines:) only to print a string on the screen.
> >
> > What's the biggest difference between FP 1 and TP7.0?
> 
> (I assume you mean speed under plain dos ?)
> 
> - FPC is 32-bit bit -> needs extra handling to access dos, since dos is
> 	not 32-bits per se.
> - FPC is written in itself to keep it maintainable. TP is in asm. Fast,
>        but maintenance nightmare.
> - FPC uses an external (GNU) party linker. This is probably the main reason.

With more substantial sources the difference becomes a little less
dramatic, and FPC is still fast.

TP is just exceptional though, and on a modern PC appears to spit out
the .exe almost as your finger leaves the compile key.   Trying to
equal that shouldn't be an aim of FPC, IMO, as TP's speed was a great
feature back in 8086-386 days, a feature suited to those times of
slower PC's.

Almost all compilers seem fast these days (but with some projects
still taking a long time of course...)