🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3877@moondance.cs.uq.oz.au> baggins@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au writes:
>dillon@overload.UUCP (Matthew Dillon) writes:
>
>>    The commercial version will have an 020 option to utilize MUL*.L and
>>    DIV*.L, bit field stuff, and the scaling modes for array indexing.
>>    Also, the commercial version will implement a couple of things I do not
>>    intend to put in the shareware version (floating point, bit fields,
>>    structural returns).
>
>What price range will the commercial version be? Do you have any idea about
>release dates? I need a *real* C compiler and I can't afford Lattice or Manx.

I'm _thrilled_ to learn that Matt's compiler will come out in a commercial
version (and, from a previous posting, a robust version), since Lattice and
Manx desperately need a good example of what a bug free compiler looks like
to force a little QA on them.

However, don't let stuff like this drive you back to Turbo Pascal prices,
Matt!  I've paid (twice) $12,000 for compilers (one C, one Pascal); there
isn't anything particularly outrageous about the cost of the existing C
compilers.  All the arguments in the games discussions about balancing cost
against expenses that need recovering, expected sales volume, competition,
cost of support, cost of materials and so on pertain even more to a compiler.

Any hints as to who might bring distribute the commercial version, Matt?
Just snooping!

Kent, the man from xanth.
<xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>