Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer
Article #1567Re: Turbo C or MSC
From: Tom Haapanen
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 1990 13:11
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 1990 13:11
48 lines
2655 bytes
2655 bytes
>> Do you know of some real and important differences that could move
>> me to select Microsoft C instead of Turbo C ?
Kevin Trojanowski <troj@icon.weeg.uiowa.edu> writes:
>1) Turbo-C costs lots less than full MSC, and about the same as Quick-C.
>
>2) Borland's debugger is better than Codeview, though it costs extra. For
> a bit less than MSC alone would cost (approx $275 mail-order, I believe),
> you can pick up Turbo-C professional (approx $200, I believe) which gives
> you Turbo-C 2.0, Turbo Debugger 1.5, and Turbo Assembler 1.5.
In version 6.0 of Microsoft C (as of last week, unannounced, but previewed
in the March BYTE), Codeview has an improved data inspector, and can now
run in extended memory on 286/386/486 machines. It also has more help.
>3) Turbo-C compiles faster than MSC, though from what I've read, MSC performs
> better optimization.
...and MSC 6.0 does better optimization yet.
>4) I prefer Borland's documentation, though Microsoft's is very usable.
Doesn't Borland still use the paperback-style manuals? If so, I'd galdly
pay $50 extra to get real binders as with MSC. MSC has comprehensive
documentation, but I haven't used Turbo C, so I can't compare.
>5) MSC consumes significantly more space on a hard drive than Turbo-C does.
> When I switched from QuickC 1.0 (no HUGE model) to Turbo-C, my total drive
> space used by the C compiler was actually reduced! Full MSC takes even
> more than QuickC.
6) Microsoft C generates code for OS/2 and Windows as well as DOS,
including DLL's.
7) MSC 6.0 includes a real Make, not the abomination in MSC 5.0, plus
a makefile generator which looks for dependencies.
8) MSC 6.0 has the Browser; this is something like a fancy interactive
cross-referencer, which uses the information built by the compiler.
>Basically, in my opinion, you can't go wrong either way, but I definitely
>prefer Turbo-C.
Ditto, except I prefer MSC. :) Take a look at March BYTE, page 115.
[ \tom haapanen -- university of waterloo -- tom@mims-iris.waterloo.edu ]
[ "i say what i say, but i say it for myself and myself only" -- me ]
[ "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1468@watserv1.waterloo.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!tomReferences:
<924@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!tom From: tom@mims-iri (Tom Haapanen) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer Subject: Re: Turbo C or MSC Message-ID: <1468@watserv1.waterloo.edu> Date: 14 Mar 90 13:11:04 GMT References: <924@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> Sender: daemon@watserv1.waterloo.edu Distribution: na Organization: University of Waterloo, WATMIMS Research Group Lines: 48