Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!brl-adm!caip!sri-spam!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!ima!johnl
From: johnl@ima.UUCP (John R. Levine)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Survey of C Compilers
Message-ID: <169@ima.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 20-Jul-86 23:01:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: ima.169
Posted: Sun Jul 20 23:01:55 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 21-Jul-86 23:41:32 EDT
References: <7975@duke.duke.UUCP> <613@looking.UUCP>
Reply-To: johnl@ima.UUCP (John R. Levine)
Organization: Javelin Software Corporation
Lines: 19
Xref: mnetor net.micro.pc:5823 net.lang.c:5378

In article <613@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
>6) Wizard C.
>	No personal experience, but friends say it is fairly good.  From too
>	small a company if this matters to you, though.
>So in the long run, Microsoft C is the winner. ... 

Funny, in my book the problem with MS-C is that it's from too large a
company.  On the infrequent occasions when I have trouble with my Wizard
C compiler, I call up Mr. Wizard, chat with him for a few minutes, and
I can count on my problem being fixed in the next update, usually within
a month.  Good luck getting Microsoft to do that.  I compared Wizard and
MS-C a while ago and found that Wizard won marginally in code size and
substantially in bug-free-ness and diagnostics.  Both MS and Wizard have
new releases of their compilers out and I have yet to try them.
-- 
John R. Levine, Javelin Software Corp., Cambridge MA +1 617 494 1400
{ ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale }!ima!johnl, Levine@YALE.EDU
The opinions expressed herein are solely those of a 12-year-old hacker
who has broken into my account and not those of any person or organization.