Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!uunet!ssbell!mcmi!amperif!unocss!ho@fergvax.unl.edu From: ho@fergvax.unl.edu (Tiny Bubbles...) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: Trouble compiling flip with TurboC 1.5 Message-ID: <1105@unocss.UUCP> Date: 21 Jul 89 18:19:36 GMT References: <26514@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> Sender: news@unocss.UUCP Reply-To: ho@fergvax.unl.edu Lines: 22 From article <26514@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, by ked@garnet.berkeley.edu (Earl H. Kinmonth): > of your problem; the rest is in the parameters. Beg, borrow, or steal > TC 2.0. It's (almost) good! What would you consider a (not almost, but actually) good PC C compiler? I had TC 1.5. The only deviations I noticed from **IX were the maddening ssignal(), and a few machine-specific things (replacing opendir/readdir with findfirst/findnext, totally different ioctl, etc.) things that most likely could not have been easily fixed. I have TC 2.0 now. The thing I hate most about it is the memory model fiasco, and that is inherent in ANY PC compiler. You just can't evade it, unless you want to have one memory model (huge) and leave it at that. > Earl H. Kinmonth > History Department > University of California, Davis > 916-752-1636 (voice, fax [2300-0800 PDT]) > 916-752-0776 secretary --- ... Michael Ho, University of Nebraska