🚀 go-pugleaf

  Ooops, looks like my little rant was misdirected. I of course
was talking about the VMS VAXCRTL. One can only hope that the
C RTL for Alpha/VMS was not a direct port...

In article <1993Jan8.222519.6703@gordian.com>, mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas) writes:
> In article <C0K3HC.A8B@dscomsa.desy.de>, hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker) writes:
> > In article <3623363@zl2tnm.gen.nz>, don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (Don Stokes) writes:
> > |>I personally believe VAXCRTL is a serious impediment to DEC's claims of 
> > |>"openness" in VMS.  Life's too short to have to go re-implementing half
> > |>the RTL whenever you try to get anything done because the standard stuff
> > |>is too slow, too buggy or more often than not, both.
> > 
> > Has anyone any idea what the DECC RTL is like? Has anyone tried it on a VAX? (is
> > it avaliable for VAX??) Comparing DECC on Alpha to VAXC is not really on...
> > anything running on the alpha tends to look fast.
> 
>   Yes. The previous author is 100% correct IMHO. I basically gave up
> on them ever getting the standard library routines (such as read(2) and 
> write(2)) being anything other than disgustingly slow (on the order
> of 10-100 times slower then using RMS directly). Worse, it could
> easily write files than *nothing* else could read. That and the early
> coverage of library routines was pretty grim. And another thing is 
> that the damn linker isn't case specific which breaks a lot of ports.
> What is worst part of this entire brain dead situation is that there
> is *no* reason for it. 
>   Don't get me started on this...
-- 

		Michael Thomas	(mike@gordian.com)
	"I don't think Bambi Eyes will get you that flame thrower..."  
		-- Hobbes to Calvin
		USnail: 20361 Irvine Ave Santa Ana Heights, Ca,	92707-5637
		PaBell: (714) 850-0205 (714) 850-0533 (fax)