Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ns-mx!iowasp!deimos!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!iuvax!maytag!watstat!dmurdoch
From: dmurdoch@watstat.waterloo.edu (Duncan Murdoch)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal
Subject: Re: Looking for GOOD optimizing compilers for MS-DOS
Message-ID: <1551@maytag.waterloo.edu>
Date: 21 Feb 90 13:44:07 GMT
References: <9311@portia.Stanford.EDU> <1541@maytag.waterloo.edu> <21125@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Sender: daemon@maytag.waterloo.edu
Reply-To: dmurdoch@watstat.waterloo.edu (Duncan Murdoch)
Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 21

In article <21125@watdragon.waterloo.edu> gcreesor@lotus.waterloo.edu (Glen Reesor) writes:
>
>That's quite the blanketing statement about TP being the best Pascal compiler
>on the market! :-)   TP may have a fancy user interface (which I like too),
>but if you're looking for better code generation I would look at Microsoft
>and Watcom compilers (just off the top of my head).  I'm sure you'd agree
>that these are respectable companies and far from "low-volume". :-)

I didn't mean to say that TP was the best Pascal compiler, just that it 
overwhelmingly dominates the market (on PCs).  Certainly Microsoft and 
Watcom are good companies, but I doubt if together they've sold 10% of the
Pascal compilers that Borland has.

Of course I don't have any hard information on this, but I've almost never
seen a question about either of those compilers in this newsgroup, nor on
the Fidonet Pascal echo.  (There were lots of questions about Quick Pascal
when it first came out, but they were more "should I buy?" than "how do I...".
Until reading your posting, I wasn't even aware that Watcom sold a Pascal
compiler.)

Duncan Murdoch