Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!yale!mintaka!mit-eddie!bu.edu!orc!decwrl!nsc!pyramid!octopus!pete
From: pete@Octopus.COM (Pete Holzmann)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer
Subject: Looking for experience with big project upgrades from MSC 5.1 to 6.0
Message-ID: <1990Jun13.132843.13966@Octopus.COM>
Date: 13 Jun 90 13:28:43 GMT
Reply-To: pete@octopus.COM (Pete Holzmann)
Organization: Octopus Enterprises, Cupertino CA
Lines: 49

I'm working on a very large commercial software project using MSC 5.1 and
some assembler. It is complex, huge, hairy, etc. Doesn't use Windows,
but does use graphics, interrupts, EMS, lots and lots of overlays, etc.

We're contemplating an upgrade to MSC 6.0, hoping for (a) smaller code;
(b) faster code; (c) better operation of CodeView under MagicCV; (d) fewer
bugs in the MSC compiler. Most especially (a). We have source code for
everything but our graphics library (GSS*CGI), which is hopefully not a
problem.

Has anybody out there been through (or most of the way through) an upgrade
of a big pile of code from 5.1 to 6.0? If so, I (and probably others in
this newsgroup) would love to benefit from your experience! If somebody
from MicroSoft cares to comment on internal product upgrade experience,
or to summarize feedback from customers, that would be great too...

    1. In general, did it go very smoothly? (i.e. no gotcha's vs. so many
	gotcha's we cried for a month... :-))

    2. What compiler switches did you end up using in order to have code
	that always runs ok without tweaking things everywhere? (Or did
	you end up tweaking everywhere?)

    3. What kind of global tweaks were required? (i.e. under MSC 5.1, you
	must make sure that any function definitions in an include file do
	not span more than one line, or you'll break CV...)

    4. What kind of hassles have you had with auxilliary tools (linkers,
	debuggers, etc.)? Does everything still work ok?

    5. Do you have a general idea of code space saved, data space saved,
	speed improvements? (Probably also in this category: rumor has it
	that constants can be/are now compiled into the local code segment,
	which would be a big win in an overlaid architecture; is this true?)

    6. Ignoring the fact that in general you've got to upgrade your tools
	eventually, was the benefit from upgrading more valuable than the
	hassle, or was it more trouble than it was worth? (i.e., if you had
	it to do over, would you wait if you could, maybe for 6.1, or even
	switch to a different compiler :-))?

*Thank* you!

Pete
-- 
Peter Holzmann, Octopus Enterprises   |(if you're a techie Christian & are
19611 La Mar Ct., Cupertino, CA 95014 |interested in helping w/ the Great
UUCP: {hpda,pyramid}!octopus!pete     |Commission, email dsa-contact@octopus)
DSA office ans mach=408/996-7746;Work (SLP) voice=408/985-7400,FAX=408/985-0859