Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:28294 comp.sys.amiga.tech:3396
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!mailrus!purdue!decwrl!labrea!polya!rokicki
From: rokicki@polya.Stanford.EDU (Tomas G. Rokicki)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: C Compilers
Message-ID: <6321@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 24 Jan 89 23:29:37 GMT
References: <496@geocub.UUCP> <30997@vax1.tcd.ie> <7261@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 25

Just my two cents.  I have and use both Manx 3.6 and Lattice 5.0.  I
prefer Lattice.  The support is infinitely better; the improvements
have been happening (when was the last time you heard anything from
Manx?)  Sure, it's bigger and slower, but you'll have fewer bugs with
the prototyping and better warnings . . .

Executable sizes are comparable; if you use stdio, Lattice will be
slightly larger because Lattice uses a more conformant stdio; if you
don't use stdio, Lattice will probably be smaller.

I still use Manx for a sizable fraction of my development, because I
have so much code with Manxisms in it that I just haven't had time
to bring over to Lattice.  I plan to insure that any future PD code
I release works under both.

I suggest you log on to BIX and compare activity in the Lattice
conference (where bug fixes are often posted minutes after bug
reports) to activity in the Manx conference (when was the last time
Jim logged on?  All I ever see there are curses and complaints.)

If this is biased, well, you asked for my opinions.  I was a beta
tester for the original Manx product and helped beta test Lattice
5.0.  My preferences are obvious.

-tom