Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!agate!e260-4c!c60c-4ab
From: c60c-4ab@e260-4c.berkeley.edu (Scott Drellishak)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Request for comparisons of C compilers
Message-ID: <1989Oct19.014956.2682@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 19 Oct 89 01:49:56 GMT
References: <3931.253b0031@uwovax.uwo.ca> <5298@ubc-cs.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator;;;;ZU44)
Reply-To: c60c-4ab@e260-4c (Scott Drellishak)
Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 20


On this newsgroup and several others, I have heard various complaints and 
praise for several brands of MS-DOS C compilers.  Among these are Turbo C,
Microsoft C, Watcom C, Zortech C(++?), and Power C.  Since there seems to
be a lot of differing opinions of these packages, I would like to hear some
comparisons of these compilers from PEOPLE WHO HAVE USED THEM.  A lot of
the comments seem to be based on "well, I saw in an add" or "I know some-
one who uses," neither of which gives very accurate information.  I will
try to compile and post any responses to this message.  Specifically, how
useful is each compiler to the serious programmer (ie Is Microsoft C the
giant of the field?  Is Turbo C a "toy compiler?"  Which compiler does the
most extensive and effective code optimization?  Which compilers are fully
and completely in keeping with the most recent version of the proposed
ANSI standard?  etc)?  Share the knowledge, and the world will be a better
place.

( Scott Drellishak
(
(   "Hey there!  Hi there!  Ho there! [smack] [smack] [smack]"
(			-The Mickey Mouse Club in the Spanish Inquisition