Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!amiga!skipper!cbmvax!daveh
From: daveh@cbmvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: Aztec C, good, bad, HELP!
Message-ID: <265@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 20-May-86 14:43:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbmvax.265
Posted: Tue May 20 14:43:02 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 23-May-86 08:00:17 EDT
References: <276@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP> <1100@h-sc1.UUCP> <243@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> <1101@h-sc1.UUCP>
Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 42

In article <1101@h-sc1.UUCP> breuel@h-sc1.UUCP (thomas breuel) writes:
>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, ...
Well, the ME versions I've been using, 3.6 and Andy Finkel's version, have
Macros, any number of named buffers, multiple screen windows within the
limits of the display device, and auto-indent.  No RE matching, true.  And
3.6 has text and C modes; LISP mode is not very complicated if you 
want to add it.  And if your talking about UN*X versions, GNU (also free)
actually executes LISP itself.  Also, isn't the "line-oriented mode" of
the UN*X systems actually a thing called EX, the extended editor that 
calls VI as its screen-oriented submode?
>
>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)
>
Well, UN*X runs on the Cray-2.  Is that close enough to a mainframe?  I've
used VI for two years while working at Bell Labs.  Its so cumbersome as
compared to EMACS, I rarely used the advanced features in VI because of
this.  True, some do use them (large system VIs I speak of), but I've
found 3.6 to give me more speed/productivity then any UN*X VI I've
ever used.

>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.

Well, I'd at least like the option to be able to link in code written in 
any other language, maybe Modula2, BCPL, etc.  No problem on a VAX, so
it shouldn't be on an Amiga, right?  The Manx Compiler runs a bit fasetr
and produces faster code.  The size of the code is Lattice's stupidity
in organizing their libraries; the Lattice code itself is small.

-- 

Dave Haynie    {caip,inhp4,allegra,seismo}!cbmvax!daveh
               "There, beyond the bounds of your weak imagination
                Lie the noble towers of my city, bright and gold"
								-Genesis