Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!cmcl2!brl-adm!umd5!purdue!i.cc.purdue.edu!j.cc.purdue.edu!pur-ee!iuvax!bobmon
From: bobmon@iuvax.UUCP (Bob...Mon)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Need to optimize 8086 C code for size
Message-ID: <6154@iuvax.UUCP>
Date: 13 Feb 88 05:07:02 GMT
References: <3680@ihlpf.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: bobmon@iuvax.UUCP (Bob...Mon)
Organization: Schizophrenics `R` Us
Lines: 13

In article <3680@ihlpf.ATT.COM> nevin1@ihlpf.UUCP (00704a-Liber,N.J.) writes:
>
>What is the best C compiler on the market today for optimizing size?  Any
>comparisons between compilers would be greatly apprieciated.

One quick'n'dirty comparison from memory:  microEmacs v3.9e

Microsoft C:	~ 110k executable (MSC4 or MSC5?)
Turbo C:	~  90k    "       (TC1.0)
Aztec C:	~  70k    "       (the one that Dan Lawrence distributes)

-- 
You TOO Can Defeat The 4-Line .signature Limit And Be Obnoxious To Your Friends And Neighbours!!!!!								...---...									Charles Cabbage on the Difference Engine running SE grade 10W40 at UKnoWhere	Babble@diffEQ	bob,mon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu	Chucky on Ada	The Slide Rules!"Spaceship Earth!  There IS no substitute!"