Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!h-sc1!breuel
From: breuel@h-sc1.UUCP (thomas breuel)
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: Aztec C, good, bad, HELP!
Message-ID: <1101@h-sc1.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 15-May-86 12:32:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: h-sc1.1101
Posted: Thu May 15 12:32:08 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 16-May-86 05:47:44 EDT
References: <276@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP> <1100@h-sc1.UUCP> <243@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP>
Organization: Harvard Univ. Science Center
Lines: 68

||... I would strongly recommend you to get the commercial version. It has lots 
||of useful goodies that make development much easier. $400 is a lot for a 'C' 
||compiler, but, then, you get not only one of the best 'C' compilers in 
||existence, but also: vi, make, as, grep, diff, a debugger, a librarian, a 
||disassembler, and lots more. Lattice and Manx are comparable in price (but
||not in performance), by the way, when you add up the prices of all the 
||Lattice programs and utilities ('C' compiler, assembler, decent text editor, 
||and 'make' together also cost about $400).
|
|Not to slight the Aztec compiler itself, but that DEAL that you mention
|doesn't sound like much of a deal.  I use a version of MicroEmacs on my
|Amiga (and VAX) that blows away most mainframe versions of "vi", so I'd
|have little need for that; and Emacs is free.  Same goes for grep and diff;

I find this difficult to believe. Both 'vi' and 'z' have regular expression
match, and substitution (in the next release), macros, named kill buffers,
auto-indent. UN*X 'vi' in addition has a line oriented mode, can edit
(almost) arbitrarily large files, has a LISP mode, ...

If you claim that your version of MicroEMACS 'blows away most mainframe
versions of vi' (I didn't know that 'vi' runs on many mainframes, I thought
it runs mostly on PDP's and Vaxen), then either you haven't used 'vi'
too much, or your version of MicroEMACS is sufficiently better than
versions 3.6 or 30 posted recently. If the latter is the case, please
let everyone know and post your version.

|there are many PD versions of each which outperform the originals, and will
|as likely outperform the Aztec versions.  Even make is available in PD
|(though I think we both agree that the Lattice version of this, and of their
|text editor, are very overpriced).  

Again, since I have the Manx system and also have many of the PD
programs you mention, I feel that I can at least have an opinion about
this... The Manx 'make' utility is the closest to UN*X make (and the
most powerful microcomputer 'make') I have seen. Sure there are PD
versions of 'grep' around, but not of ctags, which is something the
'z' editor supports and which is what you often want to use instead
of 'grep' anyhow (because it is so much faster).

|And the Aztec assembler is not a full
|powered assembler.  That and the nonstandard object code produced have

What *is* a full powered assembler then? Manx 'as' has macros and conditionals.
That is about as much as you get in most micro computer assemblers.

|kept me away from Aztec.  Having done multi-language programs on mainframes,
|I consider it essential to be able to link together anything you'd like
|no matter what its written in.  Aztec might be the thing for standalnoe
|programming that requires a minumum of Assembly code, though I can't think
|of any reason I'd want to buy their editor.

Again, what else do you need but a 'C' compiler and a good assembler?
That's precisely what Manx gives you, for the same price for which
you get the Lattice system. However, the Manx compiler is faster
and produces better code.

Now, I'm not saying that I don't consider $400 for a 'C' development
system to be a lot of money. I am just saying that the prices for
the Lattice system and the Manx system are comparable. And, btw,
you don't have to pay the extra $100 for the text editor or the
'make' utility if you don't want them. I would just strongly recommend
that you do, since I find that they 'blow away any microcomputer version'.
(Except for pcvi, which is identical to UN*X 'vi' and therefore,
naturally (:-) better than 'z').

						Thomas.

PS: again, my only connection to Manx is that I'm a satisfied customer.