Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Okay, you Amiga Types, its time to bash your amiga. :) Message-ID: <1991Feb9.050914.2107@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 9 Feb 91 05:09:14 GMT References: <91031.215406WTW101@psuvm.psu.edu> <7692@sugar.hackercorp.com> <481@cronos.metaphor.com> Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX Lines: 37 In article <481@cronos.metaphor.com> djh@neuromancer.metaphor.com (Dallas J. Hodgson) writes: > In article <7692@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > >I haven't seen anything for DOS or UNIX that comes close to Aztec C with SDB, > Gee, I'd really -=like=- to believe that! In fact, there was a stream of > messages on rec.games.programmer about how poor Amiga development tools are. I don't read rec.games.programmer, so I missed them. Why did they say? > I've used Aztec since it came out, Microsoft C up to 6.0, and Borland's > Turbo C and C++. Nothing on the Amiga comes close. Borland's and Microsoft's > integrated programming environments are a quantum leap in programmer > efficiency. I find "integrated programming environments" uniformly frustrating. They are purely a kludge to cover up the lack of an decent operating system. Compared to a normal tool in a single-tasking environment they're a quantum leap. If you use the Amiga tools as if you were using a single-tasking computer like a DOS PC you'll be disappointed... but that's your fault. Not the tools'. > On the code-generation level, neither Aztec nor SAS compilers provided the > aggressive levels of optimization that Microsoft, Metaware and GreenHills > do. Especially the latter - there's a REAL MEN's compiler. Given the tremendous overhead of the O/S (if you care to dignify them with such a term) that the resulting programs are running under, it's a bit of a waste to superoptimise them. > I spoke with Jim Goodnow (formerly of Manx) several years ago just before > 5.0 came out. "Where's the Amiga answer to Turbo-C?" His reply was more > along the lines of "(yawn) Whassamatter, don't you like our environment?" Sounds like a sensible fellow. I hope he never succumbs to the folks who want to emulate DOS on their Amigas. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' .