Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!masscomp!peora!tarpit!bilver!alex
From: alex@bilver.uucp (Alex Matulich)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: Zortech 2.0 vs Turbo C++ professional
Message-ID: <1991Jan25.034941.10811@bilver.uucp>
Date: 25 Jan 91 03:49:41 GMT
References: <688@tronsbox.xei.com> <234@nazgul.UUCP> <1991Jan21.233029.29058@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Lines: 22

In article <1991Jan21.233029.29058@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> randall@Virginia.EDU (Ran Atkinson) writes:
>I do commercial development and based on the tests I did and
>experience with both, I would suggest that optimisation is not
>meaningfully different between the two compilers.  Library quality and
>user-support and platform-support are much more meaningful standards
>for comparison.

And could someone who knows please say something about the comprehensive-
ness of either Zortech's or TC's libraries?  I use the Lattice Compiler,
but since they stopped developing the MSDOS version I have been half-
heartedly looking about for another compiler.  I didn't find TC's libraries
to be nearly as comprehensive as Lattice's.  What about Zortech?

Also, Zortech claims 99% ANSI compliance.  What, pray tell, is that
remaining 1%?  I have a sneaky fear that it may be something important
to me....  Somebody shed some light please!

-- 
 _ |__  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"