Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!ecn-pc!sandersr
From: sandersr@ecn-pc.UUCP (Robert C Sanders)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Survey of C Compilers for micros
Message-ID: <583@ecn-pc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 18-Jul-86 15:30:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: ecn-pc.583
Posted: Fri Jul 18 15:30:58 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 20-Jul-86 05:00:15 EDT
References: <7975@duke.duke.UUCP>
Reply-To: sandersr@ecn-pc.UUCP (Robert C Sanders)
Organization: Electrical Engineering Department , Purdue University
Lines: 19
Xref: watmath net.micro.pc:9247 net.lang.c:9971

[nibbles and bits...]

I am very partial to the Computer Innovations C86 compiler, but I also
like the Microsoft C compiler.  The MS compiler is slower, and not as
UNIX-like.  Both libraries are interchanable -- at least in format.  In
other words, libraries in MS OBJ format are accepted and used by both
compilers -- intended for the PC/MS DOS linker.  Aztec C and Latice C are
less friendly, and require work to port programs to/from them;  CII's C
and MS C easily port programs with UNIX (not requiring the system library),
and are close (if not) to the new ANSI standard C going through.  Third-
party libraries are also compatible with CII C86 and MS C.

					- bob
-- 
Continuing Engineering Education Telecommunications
Purdue University 		...!ihnp4!pur-ee!pc-ecn!sandersr

Let's make like a BSD process, and go FORK-OFF !!	-- bob
(and "make" a few children while we're at it ...)