Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!unmvax!bbx!bbxsda!scott
From: scott@bbxsda.UUCP (Scott Amspoker)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: MS C vs Turbo C
Message-ID: <209@bbxsda.UUCP>
Date: 6 Oct 89 15:42:03 GMT
References: <1727@naucse.UUCP> <2136@cbnewsl.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: scott@bbxsda.UUCP (Scott Amspoker)
Organization: Basis International,  Albuquerque, NM
Lines: 16

In article <2136@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> daved@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (david.dougherty,sf,) writes:
 >I'd love to use Borland's Turbo C, but I can't.  It's just not a robust
 >compiler.  You see, recently, I purchased TurboTeX from the Kinch Computer
 >Company; I also bought the source.  Now, TeX and METAFONT are very large
 >programs.  Turbo C choked.  MSC 5.1 compiled it without so much as a
 >hiccup.

Tell us more about this.  Were you using the command line compiler
or the integrated compiler?  I've run some pretty hefty source files
through Turbo C without any problem.  Am I approaching some limit?


-- 
Scott Amspoker
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM
(505) 345-5232