Re: [Dev-C++] Compilation painfully slow

[Josh M. <da...@gm...>]

On 7/26/05, Alfred P. Reaud <al...@ya...> wrote:
> =20
> The issue of ram only comes up when you are already crunched for ram.=20
> That's why the previous suggestion to monitor memory usage via Task Manag=
er
> (or whatever was the appropriate application on '98).  64MB of ram may be
> sufficient for some machines and OS combinations.  The fact that the
> compiler runs slower than the previous version isn't indicative of a ram
> size problem, as the previous compiler version ran with the existing ram
> without problem, right?=20

True, but Windows 98 by itself running on 64MB of RAM is incredibly
slow. There's a huge performance increase going from just 64MB to
128MB and while it may not directly speed up the compiler due to more
ram, the passive boost the system gets from Windows having more RAM
will be very very nice.
--=20
Darsant Silverstring=20

"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding."
-Albert Einstein