Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!lll-winken!muslix!jac
From: jac@muslix.llnl.gov (James Crotinger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Compilers
Message-ID: <40703@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV>
Date: 6 Dec 89 16:26:00 GMT
References: <34886@spock.uucp> <4016@vax1.tcd.ie>
Sender: usenet@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV
Reply-To: jac@muslix.UUCP (James Crotinger)
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory/UC Davis
Lines: 74

In article <4016@vax1.tcd.ie> rwallace@vax1.tcd.ie writes:
>
>- Manx is more UNIX like, it comes with grep, make, diff and a few other
>things. Both compilers have utilities which only come with the high-end
>version.
>
  Lattice also comes with make, diff, and grep as well as some other
UNIX and non-UNIX utilities. It also has a profiler and a post-mortem
trace back facility that I don't think Manx 3.6 has. Starting with
5.0, Lattice only has one C compiler package which comes standard with
all the utilities, C compiler, assembler, AND source level debugger
(a seperate product from Manx). 

>- Manx is faster at compiling.
>
  But only somewhat. Less than a factor of two. Neither compiler is
blindingly fast, ala Think C on the Mac. 8-(. 

>- Manx has an assembler phase and the assembler is better for stand-alone use
>than anything else I've seen other than ArgAsm. Lattice has no assembler phase
>but still manages to take longer to compile.
>
  Very subjective. The Manx assembler is not compatible with the original
Metacompost Assembler, which is sort of the standard. It's also not all that
fast. I use CAPE. 

  Lattice also compiles in two stages, but rather than have the first stage
compile to a machine specific assembly language, it compiles to a machine
independent language. This way the front end of the compiler is basically
machine independent. 

  Lattice comes with an assembler and a full set of assembly include
files. 

>- Manx is a lot more compact which is brilliant if you're trying to cram stuff
>into RAM disk on a machine with limited memory. Also means it loads off disk
>faster.
>
  The Lattice compiler and linker are pure, though, so they can be made
resident. (Perhaps this can be done with Manx as well - I don't know). 
>
>- Manx has precompiled include files which are a lot better than Lattice's
>compact include files.
>
  Lattice 5.0 also supports precompiling header files (in addition to the
header file compression). 

>- Manx 3.6 is original K&R C. Lattice 5.0 is full ANSI C.

  Lattice 5.0 isn't quite ANSI C, though 5.04 seems to have fixed most
of the descrepencies that I can think of at the moment. I don't think
Lattice supports trigraphs and some obscure orderings of declarators. 

>- Usually Manx generates more compact code, Lattice generates slightly faster
>code.
>
  As with speed of compilation, the differences here are much less than
they used to be. 

>I myself use Manx 3.6 mainly on the grounds of the compiler being more compact
>and faster, but I'm thinking of switching to Lattice C because of the full ANSI
>compliance and the standard object file format. Of course, I'd still use the
>Aztec UNIX utilities.

  I have both, but these days I use only Lattice due to the ANSI support
and the fact that I also have their C++ system. 

>
>"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem"
>Russell Wallace, Trinity College, Dublin
>VMS:  rwallace@vax1.tcd.ie
>UNIX: rwallace@unix1.tcd.ie

  Jim