HS>Carey, I've seen my program optimized for both.
HS>The difference is un-noticeable.
HS>It's not worth specifing your program to a rare target.
CB>Then good for you.
CB>However, in most cases, enabling at least 486+ optimizations do give a
CB>measurable improvement.  I've done a number of programs where simply
CB>adding the -m486 option will improve things by at least 10%.  (Of
CB>course, I've also had a number of cases where adding too many
CB>optimization switches (loop unrolling, inlining, etc.) slow the program
CB>down, but that's another story...)
CB>And, well, I can't see how you'd call 486 or 586 optimizations a 'rare'
CB>target considering most PCs are at least 486+ class machines, where both
CB>486 and 586 optimizations are acceptable.  It might be different in zone
CB>3 (where ever that is).  I don't know.  But in most places, 486+ far out
CB>number the few 386 computers left.
Then good for you.
Maybe some people don't rely on compilers to compile the fastest code 
possible.
... DCE seeks DTE for mutual exchange of data.
--- Ezycom V1.48g0 01fd016b
---------------