Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdsu!crash!jcs
From: jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: A68k vs Lattice 'C'
Keywords: asm a68k lattice
Message-ID: <2812@crash.cts.com>
Date: 25 May 90 23:54:04 GMT
References: <2196@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil>
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Lines: 24

.



  I've used CAPE 2.0, Devpac 2, and Lattice's Asm.  Devpac is by far the
fastest to assemble.  CAPE 2.0 is a little slower than Devpac, and Lattice's
Asm is much slower than both.  An earlier version of Lattice's Asm did not
handle nested macros properly, but that has been fixed.  Lattice's Asm and
Manx's assembler are currently the only assemblers that support the
68020/030 and 68881/68882. Devpac is supposed to have an 020/030/881/882
version someday.  CAPE and Devpac have optimization options, but a good
programmer will already have done the optimizations. You can do pretty
much whatever you want with any of these assemblers; only personal taste
differentiates.  I prefer Devpac for it's speed and features, then CAPE
(which doesn't require a funky OPT directive for linking, as does Devpac),
then Asm. I have no choice but to use Asm for 020/030/881/882 code (using
define constants to get the 020/../ instructions is a hack). 
  So, if A68k does what you need, use it. If both assemblers you are
comparing are equal in featues, pick the faster.



  John