Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!texbell!texsun!newstop!east!diag2!gsteckel
From: gsteckel@diag2.East.Sun.COM (Geoff Steckel - Sun BOS Software)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: LPI-C, why?
Summary: incompatible interface
Keywords: incompatible
Message-ID: <2226@east.East.Sun.COM>
Date: 17 Jul 90 17:24:30 GMT
References: <LARRY.90Jul16161846@focsys.uucp>
Sender: news@east.East.Sun.COM
Reply-To: gsteckel@diag2.East.Sun.COM (Geoff Steckel - Sun BOS Software)
Distribution: na
Organization: Omnivore Technology, Newton, Mass. (617)969-3448
Lines: 23

One major complaint/warning about LPI C:
   The call/return sequence for return of structure values from functions
is documented to be INCOMPATIBLE with ATT cc.

Why?  This would seem to be a bug, not a feature.  Any comments from ISC
on why they sell an incompatible C compiler?  This single incompatiblity
means that you cannot safely intermix modules compiled with the two compilers.
I don't use structure return values often, but I have NO idea whether or
not any random module I've inherited does, and if it's a library, have
NO WAY to find out.

LPI C also seems not to produce better code than the ATT compiler, at least
on the 10 or so programs I ran through it.

I bought the development kit but don't use LPI cc.  I use GCC if I need
an ANSI C compiler.  It can be forced to generate compatible code.
$700 wasted.

	regards,
	geoff steckel (gwes@wjh12.harvard.EDU)
			(...!husc6!wjh12!omnivore!gws)
Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Sun Microsystems, despite the From: line.
This posting is entirely the author's responsibility.