🚀 go-pugleaf

In <MUTS.93Nov13001723@compi.hobby.nl> muts@compi.hobby.nl (Peter Mutsaers) writes:

| >> On Wed, 10 Nov 1993 21:15:58 GMT, przemek@rrdbartok.nist.gov
| >> (Przemek Klosowski) said:
| 
|   PK> Would Workshop and SGI cc use proprietary extensions to the
|   PK> executable format?  Does anyone know if there is a patch or
|   PK> workaround to be used with gcc?
| 
| SGI uses proprietary extensions more and more, and I am beginning to
| regret more and more that we ever bought SGI. There is no workaround
| as far as I know.

SGI has had "propietary" extensions in its compilers for *at least*
6 years.  That is to say, we have added features, etc.  That's what
distinguishes most 'real' computer companies from their competitors;
they add features.  Otherwise everybody is building clones, which
may be good for prices (and to be fair, compatibility), but isn't
terribly good for adding value, new features, new capabilities,
etc.

If you can afford to buy Workshop (it ain't cheap), you can certainly
afford to buy the SGI development system.
--

The most beautiful things in the world are              |   Dave Olson
those from which all excess weight has been             |   Silicon Graphics
removed.  -Henry Ford                                   |   olson@sgi.com