Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: nyu notesfiles V1.1 4/1/84; site acf4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!cmcl2!acf4!ais6438
From: ais6438@acf4.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.cbm
Subject: Re: compilers for the 6502
Message-ID: <12900002@acf4.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 6-May-84 06:20:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: acf4.12900002
Posted: Sun May  6 06:20:00 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 18-May-84 02:36:59 EDT
References: <850@unm-cvax.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 21
Nf-ID: #R:unm-cvax:-85000:acf4:12900002:000:1128
Nf-From: acf4!ais6438    May 17 06:20:00 1984

Well, you sound convincing, but is there anything serious besides the disk
format that would prevent me from getting something like Turbo Pascal for the
Commodore with Commodore CP/M?  I'd be happy to let the Z80 do the job.

Incidentally, I wonder why I don't hear more about Commie CP/M.  It's an 
attractive idea, isn't it, having two microprocessors sharing memory, helping
each other out, reading to each other at night? 

Perhaps I don't hear much about Commodore CP/M because many have had the
same compatibility problems I have had:
three CP/M units in a row would not
boot on my system (64 of last summer, brand new disk drive).  I've had no
problems with any other disks or cartridges.  The last CP/M was tested at the
store, and worked on the portable and one regular 64, but not on another.  So
they gave me a refund and said give Commodore a few months to get straightened
out.

But to get closer to your subject:
The thing that worries me about the 64 is the small address space.  I don't
really know, but (and set me straight on this, please) wdn't a C compiler leave
very little room on the 64 for a C program?