Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!mintaka!snorkelwacker!spdcc!ima!haddock!karl From: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: LPI-C, why? Summary: why not? Message-ID: <17097@haddock.ima.isc.com> Date: 17 Jul 90 00:08:11 GMT References: Reply-To: karl@kelp.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) Organization: Interactive Systems, Cambridge, MA 02138-5302 Lines: 16 In article larry@focsys.uucp (Larry Williamson) writes: >ISC's new 2.2 release comes with a C compiler from LPI. The >introduction in the manual does not give much of an excuse to use this >new compiler. Plain cc is more or less as it's always been; lpicc is intended to be ANSI compliant. I imagine some customers have ANSI C programs they'd like to be able to compile. >Does not sound too exciting to me. If you're not interested in ANSI C, then by all means keep using the old one. That's why we ship it under a separate name instead of just overwriting cc. Karl W. Z. Heuer (karl@kelp.ima.isc.com or ima!kelp!karl), The Walking Lint (I'm not speaking for ISC, of course.)