Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!decwrl!bacchus.pa.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!wjg.enet.dec.com!guineau
From: guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Lattice C 5.05
Message-ID: <14318@shlump.nac.dec.com>
Date: 7 Aug 90 12:23:34 GMT
References: <13632@cbmvax.commodore.com> <'57$??%@rpi.edu>
Sender: newsdaemon@shlump.nac.dec.com
Reply-To: guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Marlboro, MA
Lines: 33

In article <13632@cbmvax.commodore.com>, eric@cbmvax.commodore.com (Eric Cotton)
writes:
|> From: eric@cbmvax.commodore.com (Eric Cotton)
|> Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
|> Subject: Re: Lattice C 5.05
|> Reply-To: eric@cbmvax (Eric Cotton)
|> 
|> In article <'57$??%@rpi.edu> peck@ral.rpi.edu (Joseph Peck) writes:
|> >I just received Lattice C within the last two weeks, but I found 
|> >something peculiar about it.  Both the disks and the title bar 
|> >say v5.05, but when I actually compile a program, the text that 
|> >it initially spurts out says something like Lattice Compiler v5.04 ....
|> >Did Lattice simply forget to update their little message, or was I
|> >ripped off?  I was hoping that some kind soul would take out their 
|> >version of 5.05 and check what message they get upon compiling.  
|> 
|> The v5.04 message you saw was generated by LC (which in turn invokes LC1
|> and LC2).  You'll probably find that LC1 and LC2, if executed independently,
|> will report V5.05.
|> -- 
|> Eric Cotton
|> Commodore-Amiga                                               (215) 431-9100
|> 1200 Wilson Drive                        {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!eric
|> West Chester, PA 19380            "I don't find this stuff amusing anymore."
|>

I just NewZAPed it to say 5.05 (for sanity reasons :-)

 
--
W. John Guineau   			guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corporation
Marlboro MA. 01752