🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1990Mar26.174313.1976@eng.umd.edu> dank@eng.umd.edu (Daniel R. Kuespert) writes:
| For fast code and really good optimization, MSC is the way to go.
| Unless you're doing really loop-intensive types of code, though, it 
| may not be worth coping with all the command-line switches and 
| byzantine error messages MSC spews out, though.

As far as speed of the resultant program is concerned, MSC 6.0 has Watcom on
the run.  It's impressive.  However, there is one other plus for MSC.  Since
ver 5.0, the compiler has generated re-entrant code (i.e. code that will
run in protected mode).  Being able to port code from MS-DOS to OS/2 or
WinNext with a minimum of hassle seems, to me at least, to be a _big_ plus.

Don't get me wrong.  I'm a TC user, and I like Borland's product very much.
However, I'm rapidly reaching the point where I wish I had chosen MSC
instead.  Hell, Borland won't even support Windows.  It get's a little
irksome when a company with a fine product refuses to support a particular
environment for political reasons.

--
Rick (schaut@garfield.cs.wisc.edu)

"Your degree in Economics is not necessarily an aide to finding gainfull
emplyoment, but at least it helps you understand why you're unemployed"