Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sphinx.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!shor
From: shor@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Melinda Shore)
Newsgroups: net.micro.cpm
Subject: Re: Help! I need a better C compiler.
Message-ID: <414@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 3-May-85 18:52:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: sphinx.414
Posted: Fri May  3 18:52:15 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 4-May-85 02:18:54 EDT
References: <687@ssc-vax.UUCP>, <25275@lanl.ARPA>
Organization: U. Chicago - Computation Center
Lines: 31

[]
> From: jp@lanl.ARPA
> I suggest you look at Computer Innovations CI-86.  

Whoops!!  The original poster was looking for a compiler for a CP/M 2.2
system.  The C-86 compiler is for MS-DOS systems.  Perhaps there's a C-86
for CP/M-86, but this still won't run on a humble z-80.  

There are a number of reasons not to go with the BDS compiler, the primary
one being slight non-standardness.  I have the Manx Aztec C.  It's quite
standard and is rather nice to work with.  The problem with it is that it
generates lousy code (n.b. mine is rather old.  I understand newer releases
are somewhat tighter).  No discussions of CP/M C compilers would be complete
without mention of Software Toolworks' C/80.  Very inexpensive, very solid
compiler, but *very* incomplete.  I bought one two years ago.  At that time
the rather tiny library was in assembler.  I think that right now the most
appealing of the compilers is EcoSoft C.  I don't have one, but I understand
that they generate good, fast code and are reasonably K & R standard.  I
think it also supports post-K & R constructs.

Hope this helps ...

-- 

Melinda Shore 
University of Chicago Computation Center

uucp:     ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!shor
Mailnet:  staff.melinda@uchicago.mailnet
Bitnet:	  shor%sphinx@uchicago.bitnet
ARPA:	  staff.melinda%uchicago.mailnet@mit-multics.arpa