Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!cmcl2!yale!husc6!think!rutgers!caip!clyde!watmath!watnot!watdcsu!magore
From: magore@watdcsu.UUCP (M.A.Gore - ICR)
Newsgroups: net.micro.68k
Subject: Re: The Motorola 68030
Message-ID: <2620@watdcsu.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 5-Oct-86 12:54:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.2620
Posted: Sun Oct  5 12:54:58 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 7-Oct-86 19:45:59 EDT
References: <2270@gitpyr.UUCP> <55500016@trsvax>
Reply-To: magore@watdcsu.UUCP (M.A.Gore - ICR)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 23


	The point has been raised that 68k compilers can be simply ported
from 68k to 68030 because of the compatibility. Therefore when we do have
the 68030 chip we will be -all set and ready- to move into the
new generation.... Well this is true!.... It's also true that
the number of bug free C compilers out for the 68k at the consumer
level (Mark Williams is perhaps *1* bug free compiler) is low... <What
I am saying is look at the bug reports in this news group....> I would
shutter to think that (those) compilers would be the foundation
for the next generation! But even the lowly 8086 has MANY good C
compilers at the consumer level... The only good 68k C compilers
in volume are at the commercial level (in unix systems etc) with
little competition to make them better across the market.
	Least anyone misunderstand I like the 68k! Which is why I
point out this concern.... In this area of bugs the 68k support
has a long way to go - It's like benchmarks you have to weigh *all*
of the factors - not just how good the system *could* be - I know
many people know this - I just thought I would condense the thoughts
here .....

# Mike Gore 
# Institute for Computer Research.
# These ideas/concepts do not imply views held by the University of Waterloo.