Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!ncar!ico!ism780c!darryl From: darryl@ism780c.isc.com (Darryl Richman) Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386 Subject: Re: SCO MicroSoft C Compiler comments Message-ID: <32335@ism780c.isc.com> Date: 28 Aug 89 13:24:11 GMT References: <7227@megatest.UUCP> <610@uci.UUCP> <123591@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <196@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> Reply-To: darryl@ism780c.UUCP (Darryl Richman) Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Santa Monica CA Lines: 19 In article <196@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: "Both MP and ix had some cases in "which the C compiler would generate code which the assembler couldn't "handle, using registers not in the 386 (R10 and R11 are PDP-11). Not to say that the original compiler didn't have a few bugs when it shipped, but I'm surprised by this particular comment. (I seem to be getting new surprises all the time! :-() I don't believe that the AT&T RCC compiler was ever ported to the PDP-11, and it's a complete rewrite from the PCC that we all know and love (?). Compared to any truly optimizing compiler, RCC is still slow and stupid, but compared to the old PCC, it's a real whiz! --Darryl Richman -- Copyright (c) 1989 Darryl Richman The views expressed are the author's alone darryl@ism780c.isc.com INTERACTIVE Systems Corp.-A Kodak Company "For every problem, there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken