-=> Quoting Lawrence Sayre to All <=- 

 LS> I'd like to hear comments from people experienced with the use of the
 LS> freeware GNU C/C++ (EMX 0.9b) compiler and programming environment
 LS> for OS/2.  I'd like to begin learning C/C++, and as such would like to
 LS> keep the cost down until I'm proficient enough to justify the expense
 LS> of a good compiler.  With learning in mind, is this a wise starting
 LS> point, or is it a cumbersome, deficient, and behind the times system
 LS> that will hinder my learning curve?  Is GNU easy to install, and is
 LS> quality documentation available?  Is it (relatively) complete?  Is it
 LS> better to take the $ plunge into a quality compiler and programming
 LS> environment right off the bat, and if so, which do you recommend.
 LS> Please, only people who have used, or are still using GNU reply.

Some people say EMX/GCC is hard to setup and some say its easy.  If you
know all the aspects of compiling and linking it will help in setting
up the EMX.  INSTALL.DOC will tell you everything you need to know to
get set up.

The biggest problem with EMX/GCC is there is no documentation for the
PM API calls.

However, I have seen mention in the EMX mailing list that people are
working on creating Web sites to document the PM API.

I use Borland C++ v2.0 and EMX v0.9b.  As for compiling I don't prefer
one over the other.  BC++ has a nice PM debugger and probably the nicest
(of any compiler) Resource Workshop for creating dialogs.

Indellible Blue (was/is) selling BC++ 2.0 for $99, which is hard to pass up,
even if BC++ is buggy and it presently looks like it will never be
upgraded.  However, if I had the money (and the memory and disk space)
I'd go with IBM's VAC++ compiler, then Watcom.

Phil - Fido:  1:124/8014.0 | Internet:  phil.crown{at}bluecafe.com

--- Blue Wave/OS2 v2.30