Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!uw-june!entropy!dataio!bright
From: bright@dataio.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Turbo C
Message-ID: <1255@dataio.Data-IO.COM>
Date: Wed, 18-Feb-87 13:42:26 EST
Article-I.D.: dataio.1255
Posted: Wed Feb 18 13:42:26 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Feb-87 04:15:21 EST
References: <203@msdc.b.msdc.UUCP> <541@sdiris1.UUCP> <168@ucdavis.UUCP>
Reply-To: bright@dataio.UUCP (Walter Bright)
Distribution: na
Organization: Data I/O - FutureNet Corp., Redmond, WA
Lines: 12

In article <168@ucdavis.UUCP> ccs016@ucdavis.UUCP (Patrick Tully) writes:
>Well... What I'm worried about is that it is a ONE pass compiler. Doesn't
>this mean we have to conform to the top down design? If it is infact a
>one pass compiler as mentioned a couple postings ago then there is no
>way in my opinion that it will become the standard compiler, plus most
>C'ers are very defensive of K&R.

There is no obstacle to creating a 1-pass compiler that is full K+R or
ANSIC C. The compiler I wrote (Datalight C) is two pass mainly to
reduce memory requirements.

The Greenhills C compiler is 1 pass.