Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!dsac.dla.mil!dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil!dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil!nol2321
From: nol2321@dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil (Jim Dunn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer
Subject: Re: Best C Compiler
Keywords: Compilers
Message-ID: <1982@dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil>
Date: 27 Mar 90 02:33:40 GMT
References: <1990Mar19.175316.16898@Octopus.COM> <3130@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov> <1990Mar20.163453.29787@Octopus.COM> <2940@alpha.cam.nist.gov>
Organization: Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center, Columbus
Lines: 19

In article <2940@alpha.cam.nist.gov> koontz@cam.nist.gov (John E. Koontz X5180) writes:
>
>If I may humbly enquire, is the MIX's Power C any good?  It seems to be very
>inexpensive, at $40.00 for compiler and debugger.  

*******************************************************************************

SURE!!!  The Power C will probably give you the biggest bang for the buck!  You
don't need to spend the bucks for MsC 5.1, since QuickC 2.0 will give you just
as much speed and power and compactness (almost!).  And Turbo C, well, they'll
have a brand new version 3.0 before long and the market will sway again...

NO ONE REALLY KNOWS WHAT'S BEST!!!  Just pick something and stick with it, as
long as there's competition (i.e. microsoft, borland, mix, zortech...) there
will be another BETTER version...

(I use MsC 5.1, Quick C 2.01, Turbo C 2.0.  Quick C is my most commonly used.)

:)