Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!iuvax!rutgers!gauss.rutgers.edu!math.rutgers.edu!bumby From: bumby@math.rutgers.edu (Richard Bumby) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: Request for comparisons of C compilers Message-ID: Date: 20 Oct 89 22:12:59 GMT References: <3931.253b0031@uwovax.uwo.ca> <5298@ubc-cs.UUCP> <1989Oct19.014956.2682@agate.berkeley.edu> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 19 Cc: bumby In article <1989Oct19.014956.2682@agate.berkeley.edu> c60c-4ab@e260-4c.berkeley.edu (Scott Drellishak) writes: > 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 number of magazines do this sort of thing on a regular basis. I like the treatment in "Micro Cornucopia". When I was looking for a small-but-powerful C to use on my laptop, I found the wealth of detail in their reviews to be essential to making an informed choice. It would be difficult to do justice to a 5 or 6 page article with lots of tabular comparisons in this format. -- --R. T. Bumby ** Math ** Rutgers ** New Brunswick ** (in one form or another for all kinds of mail) [bumby@math.rutgers.edu]