Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu!petersen
From: petersen@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu (Paul Petersen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer
Subject: Re: Turbo C v2.0
Message-ID: <1990Mar12.220732.10401@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 12 Mar 90 22:07:32 GMT
References: <9003091838.AA21834@decwrl.dec.com> <25F9EA26.21884@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> <1990Mar12.005855.1194@holos0.uucp> <1990Mar12.183115.18170@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News)
Reply-To: petersen@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu (Paul Petersen)
Organization: Center for Supercomputing R&D (Cedar), U. of Ill.
Lines: 17

This is the original poster.  I recieved mail saying that their versions
of TurboC v2.0 worked correctly.  I was baseing my claim on differences
in output from my programs on different platforms,  unfortunately I 
reported the wrong problem (GIGO, damn CR/LF stupidity) compounded by the
fact that the Turbo-Debugger's Inspect function does not work in the same
way of the TurboC Inspect function.  It's the debugger that treats
unsigned longs as signed longs.   Sorry for jumping to the wrong
conclusion, now back into my hole....

-Paul Petersen


University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Center for Supercomputing Research and Development

    UUCP:    {uunet,convex}!uiucuxc!uicsrd!petersen
    INTERNET: petersen@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu