🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4641@feldspar30.UUCP> nellis@motcid.UUCP (Michael R. Nellis) writes:
>
>
>
>I am looking to purchase a 'C' compiler.
>My previous experience with compilers is with
>the Microsoft 5.0 C compiler with QuickC and
>Codeview.  I have talked to persons with 
>TurboC experience and have heard good things.
>The latest version of MS C, 6.0, is said to
>have many new features and a new look.  Does
>anyone have any words of wisdom for me?  Does
>the price difference of ~$150 for the professional
>TurboC versus the ~$310 for the MS C 6.0 have
>a factor?  Money is not an issue here, support,
>and functionality is.
>
>I would greatly appreciate any input and will post
>the results if anyone is interested.



<Putting on asbestos suit>

These are my own opinions, based on my experiences with Turbo C 2.00
and Microsoft C 5.1 & 6.0

Turbo C is a fairly robust compiler that is more or less ANSI compliant.
(I believe it was released before the officail standard was, but conforms
to the draft) TC is FAST! and it has a robust set of library routines and
tools. It generates reasonable code. The integrated development environment
is "cute" but not terribly functional for big projects. There are several
well known bugs in the compiler and/or library routines, but for the most
part they can worked around easily without looking kludgy.

The debugger is fairly good, and from what I understand the lastest version
of Turbo Debugger is even better.

Microsoft C is a robust compiler as well, but the support tools provided
with it are brain-dead. the MAKE is absurd, and CodeView is simply lame.
6.0 is HIGHLY ANSI compliant, and runs a great deal faster than 5.1, but
this is still fairly slow in comparison to TC.

Both support a fairly robust graphics package, although I like BGI (TC) better.

Microsoft C seems to be the "industry standard" and the compiler is available
for both DOS and OS/2 platforms, which is important if you want to develop
programs for both systems.

Both compilers are supported very well by third party library vendors.

As far as vendor support goes for the compilers, if you want GOOD support
from Microsoft, you gotta pay for it. On the rare occasion I have had to
talk to Borland they were both pleasant and helpfull.

Obviously, I prefer Turbo C over Microsoft, but this is largely due to
personal preference - They are both good compilers and both have their
drawbacks. I can note, however, that I work with Turbo C daily, and have
developed a 28000 line application with it, which is for the most part,
still easy to debug and maintain (although I guess a lot of that has to do
with style rather than the compiler).

My $.02 :)

Steve

<Removing asbestos suit>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
steve.resnick@f105.n143.z1@FIDONET.ORG #include<std_disclaimer.h>
Flames, grammar errors, spelling errrors >/dev/nul
----------------------------------------------------------------------------