Norcroft versus GCC
A full comparison of Norcroft versus GCC is quite extensive.
In the interests of having something here instead of nothing, I will
initially keep this to a list of advantages of each, but it will be
extended later on.
- Faster than GCC to compile programs, probably by about two times.
- Uses less memory, especially for C++, which can take large amounts of
when optimisation is on with GCC.
- Although it has a smaller number of warnings, they can be a lot
stronger in places, especially for enumeration types.
- It can generate modules, whilst GCC can't.
- Can generate debug information suitable for DDT.
- Is able to compile GNU extensions, which is required for some
- Supports a much newer C++ implementation than Norcroft, as well
- Large range of warnings, which can be extensively controlled.
- Many other switches to control compiliation behaviour.
- Freely available.
- Can build with either SharedCLibrary or Unixlib.
- Generate code that runs at very similar speed (when GCC's optimisation
is turned on), although GCC can generate larger executables in some instances.