Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!rochester!crdgw1!ge-dab!tarpit!bilver!alex
From: alex@bilver.UUCP (Alex Matulich)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: Which C compiler: TC or MS?
Keywords: TC or MS C Compiler
Message-ID: <1009@bilver.UUCP>
Date: 24 Sep 90 00:43:23 GMT
References: <4641@feldspar30.UUCP> <4552@tuminfo1.lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de> <1990Sep21.195632.17253@maytag.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: alex@bilver.UUCP (Alex Matulich)
Distribution: comp
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Lines: 23

In article <1990Sep21.195632.17253@maytag.waterloo.edu> cgeisler@maytag.waterloo.edu (Craig Eisler) writes:
>I've used a number of different development platforms, and the WATCOM one 
>is by far the best.
>
>Just one lone voice in the wilderness,

And here's another lone voice (me) in the wilderness:

I prefer Lattice.  After using Microsoft's and Borland's C compilers,
discovering Lattice was a relief.  I never want to go back.  Lattice's
function libraries are far more comprehensive than either MSC's or TC's
(especially in the graphics), the manuals are superb, and so is the
optimizing and code generation.  So is the technical support.

Or so WAS the technical support.  Lattice will continue to correct
problems as they crop up, but they said they will not give the compiler
any more capabilities.  That's unfortunate.  But it still does everything
I want, and very well too.
-- 
 _ |__  Alex Matulich   (alex@bilver.UUCP)
 /(+__>  Unicorn Research Corp, 4621 N Landmark Dr, Orlando, FL 32817
//| \     UUCP:  ...uunet!tarpit!bilver!alex
///__)     bitnet:  IN%"bilver!alex@uunet.uu.net"