Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!amdahl!pacbell!indetech!sharkey!metapyr!david
From: david@metapyr.UUCP (David Relson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: 386 C compiler (Unix,MSC)/ 386 box recommendations?
Message-ID: <174@metapyr.UUCP>
Date: 13 Feb 90 11:45:02 GMT
References: <750@npiatl.UUCP> <286@intek01.UUCP> <3576@uceng.UC.EDU>
Reply-To: david@metapyr.UUCP (David Relson)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Meta Systems, Ltd. -- Ann Arbor, MI
Lines: 8

Xenix 386 does have a switch so that code can be generated for a 286 or a 386.
It's been a year since I used it so some of the following will be a bit indefinite.

Xenix actually had two different compilers on it - both Microsoft, one for the
286 and one for the 386.  The 386 compiler was more modern (in terms on ANSI 
compatibility) so code that would compile for the 386 might not compile when the286 option was specified.  (It drove me nuts until I realized that it was two 
different parsers and code generators, not a single parser with two code 
generators (or one code generator working off of a 286/386 switch).)