Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!athena.mit.edu!jfc
From: jfc@athena.mit.edu (John F Carr)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.rt
Subject: Re: HC 2
Message-ID: <1991Jan4.054021.3334@athena.mit.edu>
Date: 4 Jan 91 05:40:21 GMT
References: <1990Dec19.140919.4497@athena.mit.edu> <1991Jan4.000714.6440@panews>
Sender: news@athena.mit.edu (News system)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 19

In article <1991Jan4.000714.6440@panews> brunner@ibmsupt.UUCP () writes:
>Note that gcc 1.37 is available from
>several sites on the internet, and that 1.38 has been announced and the
>RT is among the supported platforms.

The "released" version of gcc for the RT is based on 1.35.99 (essentially
the same as 1.36) with many modifications (I put "released" in quotes
becuase this is not an official FSF release). I find hc 2.1y to be a better
compiler: it produces faster, smaller code that has fewer bugs.  Neither gcc
1.37 nor gcc 1.38 supports the RT.  gcc version 2 will support the RT and
will be a viable alternative to hc (code quality is slightly worse than hc;
this will probably change), but I don't know when it will be released.

Is there a reason not to make later versions of hc 2.1 available, with the
warning that there are known bugs?  hc 2.1y has bugs too; having 2 versions
available increases the chances of finding a compiler that works.

--
    John Carr (jfc@athena.mit.edu)