Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!blake!ogccse!littlei!guardian!peter
From: peter@guardian.UUCP (peter)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: PLM vs. C for 80286/80386
Keywords: PLM C SELECTOR
Message-ID: <239@guardian.UUCP>
Date: 10 Jul 89 17:44:15 GMT
References: <598@philtis.UUCP> <14381@bfmny0.UUCP> <1765@auspex.auspex.com> <2760@maccs.McMaster.CA> <95@uci.UUCP>
Reply-To: peter@langlab1.hf.intel.com (Peter Plamondon)
Organization: Intel Development Tools Operation, Hillsboro OR
Lines: 28

In article <95@uci.UUCP> clay@uci.UUCP (News Administrator) writes:
>
>I have actually used the latest (as of Fall, '88) version of Intel C with
>a specific eye towards reasonable code and PL/M compatibility.  I was pleased
>to see both.  This is version 3.x (maybe 4.x, I can't remember).  This was NOT
>the original hack job that was too awful for words.

That was iC-86 V4.0.

>With regards to PL/M compatibility, there is no way to say "SELECTOR" in C such
>that LINK86 will not complain of type mismatches with PL/M modules, but the

iC-86 V4.1 includes the "selector" data type, which is compatibile with
the PL/M selector.  iC-86 V4.1 is available on DOS now, on iRMX(tm) I
(aka iRMX-86) in 3-4 weeks.  iC-286 V4.1 is also available on DOS now,
on iRMX II (aka iRMX 286) in 3-4 weeks.  People who suffered through the
V3.x compilers on iRMX can upgrade to V4.1 free of charge!

>code works fine.
>

On this matter, I _DO_ speak for Intel!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Plamondon, Intel Corp, 5200 NE Elam Young Pkwy, Hillsboro, OR  97124-6497
Internet: peter@langlab1.hf.intel.com                           +1 503-696-5219
UUNET   : uunet!intelhf!langlab1!peter     "I speak for myself, as best I can."
UUCP    : tektronix!psu-cs!foobar!langlab1.hf.intel.com!peter    
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------