Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:7189 comp.sys.ibm.pc:11697
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!wfp
From: wfp@dasys1.UUCP (William Phillips)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: MSC Danger (was Re: Turbo C vs Quick C)
Summary: MSC did it too
Keywords: good better best
Message-ID: <2946@dasys1.UUCP>
Date: 13 Feb 88 06:03:23 GMT
References: <389@lscvax.UUCP> <567@naucse.UUCP>
Organization: The Big Electric Cat
Lines: 14

In article <567@naucse.UUCP>, wew@naucse.UUCP (Bill Wilson) writes:
> Turbo C is superior to Quick C.  On our campus here we have also
> had Quick C blow away hard drives, so be careful.

I know of a case where MSC (4.0 I think) utterly scrambled a hard drive
(not backed up, natch), when a module compiled with one memory model was
linked with modules compiled with a different model.  I've forgotten the
exact details, but I saw what was left of the directories after the
program was run -- total garbage.  So watch out for that one!
 
-- 
William Phillips                 {allegra,philabs,cmcl2}!phri\
Big Electric Cat Public Unix           {bellcore,cmcl2}!cucard!dasys1!wfp
New York, NY, USA                (-: Just say "NO" to OS/2! :-)