Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!hybrid!scifi!bywater!uunet!cbmvax!bj
From: bj@cbmvax.commodore.com (Brian Jackson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: Is it me or Manx C 5.0c (the -MR option)
Message-ID: <19461@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 4 Mar 91 01:07:54 GMT
References: <46418@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Reply-To: bj@cbmvax.commodore.com (Brian Jackson)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 28

In article <46418@nigel.ee.udel.edu> Ata@system-m.phx.bull.com (John G. Ata) writes:
>There is a Manx 5.0e on the Manx BB.  However, after downloading it, it
>still prints out "Manx 5.0d September 30, 1990" with the only change
>being the date from Sep 28 to Sep 30.  It does not fix the "too complex"
>problem.  This problem has a simple test case where the line:
>          name [*cpos] = fname [*cpos]; causes the error.  name and
>fname are character arrays and cpos points to an integer.  Doesn't sound
>too complex to me, but Manx didn't see it that way.  When I use the -so
>option, the problem goes away.  It must be either the -so option, or one
>of the optimize options which makes the problem go away.  Not all
>optimize options will work, but only a specific one which -so includes.
>
>                    John

I really don't want to play the role of Manx spokesman, here, but they
told me on the phone the other day that the 5.0e1 "fix" fixed *only*
the "shared library with no function arguments" problem and only that
one.  They said that they are working on a release that will "fix all
known bugs".  RSN.  

bj

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 | Brian Jackson  Software Engineer, Commodore-Amiga Inc.  GEnie: B.J. |
 | bj@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com    or  ...{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!bj     |
 | "We defy augury"                                                    |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------