Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!nike!caip!cbmvax!daveh
From: daveh@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: net.micro.cbm
Subject: Re: Which C compiler is better?.
Message-ID: <334@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Jun-86 11:11:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbmvax.334
Posted: Wed Jun  4 11:11:44 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Jun-86 19:55:56 EDT
References: <507@noscvax.UUCP>
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 31

> Keywords: C, abacus, proline
> 
> Can anyone offer wisdom regarding the relative merits of Abacus and
> Proline C compilers for the C-128?  I myself have the C-Power (Proline)
> for my C-64 and am happy with it (although I have not used it nearly
> as much as I would like to, and therefore probably am not as familiar
> with it as some of you).  I have heard mostly comments favoring C-Power.
> 
> Any opinions (informed ones of course) would be appreciated.
> 
> Bill
> Computer Sciences Corp.

I've used the C64 C-Power compiler, and I've heard most of the details of
the Abacus version.  I think the C-Power compiler is FAR superior to the 
Abacus compiler.  The C-Power object code runs faster than any other compiler
I've used on the 64; a Seive benchmark I ran executed in 40 seconds for the
Proline compiler, 90 seconds in PROMAL, about 9 minutes in PASCAL, and 1 1/2
hours or so in C128 BASIC.  I didn't realize that Proline had released their
compiler for the C128, but if they have, I'll certainly buy it.

-- 
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Dave Haynie    {caip,inhp4,allegra,seismo}!cbmvax!daveh

	"I read dozens of books, 'bout heros and crooks,
	 and I learned much, of both of their style.."
						-Jimmy Buffet

	These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be yours too.
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/