Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-unix!sri-spam!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!labrea!Lindy!vandys
From: vandys@Lindy.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: MIX-c compiler experiences
Message-ID: <200@Lindy.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: Thu, 30-Apr-87 13:24:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: Lindy.200
Posted: Thu Apr 30 13:24:54 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 2-May-87 01:28:27 EDT
References: <3209@sunybcs.UUCP>
Organization: Stanford University Information Technology Services
Lines: 29
Keywords: review
Xref: utgpu comp.lang.c:1916 comp.sys.ibm.pc:3256
Summary: Further readings on MIX-C



  Yah, I bought the package for its price, too.  Let me amplify on the
debugger, though: FLAKY.  I suffered through corrupted screen I/O,
mysterious crashes, and lost breakpoints.  When it worked, it was truly
nice.

  The libraries were okay, if a little short on quality.  My favorite
was:
  if( (fp = fopen(argv[1],"r")) == NULL ){
    perror(argv[1]);
    exit(1);
  }
  which would result (for a non-existent file) in:
  <file>: No error.

  Oh, well.  They also didn't seem to take typing too seriously, as
redeclaration of function types and usage of void function's values
elicited no complaint whatsoever.

  So, bottom line: a "cheap thrill" C compiler.  I think you'd be out
on a limb to try and use it for anything serious.  For myself, I still
use Microsoft C version 1, and it's a much better compiler:  better
error messages, better code, and faster compiles.  Amazingly, symdeb
works on it, too!

                      Andrew Valencia
		      vandys@lindy.stanford.edu
		      br.ajv@rlg.BITNET