Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!purdue!decwrl!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!super!rminnich
From: rminnich@super.ORG (Ronald G Minnich)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: lattice/MANX bug when compiling large programs
Message-ID: <808@super.ORG>
Date: 3 Oct 88 15:52:26 GMT
References: <12499@oberon.USC.EDU> <6439@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <12521@oberon.USC.EDU>
Sender: uucp@super.ORG
Reply-To: rminnich@duper.UUCP (Ronald G Minnich)
Organization: Supercomputing Research Center, Lanham, MD
Lines: 10

In article <12521@oberon.USC.EDU> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes:
>p. C-9: "the default is to use 32-bit absolute addressing, which allows 
>data hunks of virtually unlimited size..." Also the fact that both -b  and -r
>allow a numweric operand is not documented anywhere.
Oh yeah, neat isn't it. My theory is that
they wanted to do well on the benchmarks and so changed the sense
of the flags at the last minute. Or something. Sure ticked me 
off when i found this one. YOu have to look at man pages for lc1 and lc2
to know what is really happening. 
ron