🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Dec15.184527.9190@wavehh.hanse.de> cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de (Martin Cracauer) writes:
>A friend of mine told me, that the HP C-Compiler produces better code
>than gcc for the Precision Architectures.

"Better" is a very broad term.  In many cases, the HP compiler will produce
more efficient code than a recent release of gcc.  In some cases it does not.
There are problems with HP's compiler too though.  Read some of the
comp.sys.hp.* newsgroups to learn more about the HP C compiler.

>
>Is that true? If yes, can you tell me what the problems are?

The "problem" is that not as much time has been spent on the PA processor
as, say, the SPARC or m68k.  This situation is improving.  

>Please respond via e-mail. Posting pros of a commercial compiler in
>gnu.??? is not recommended (I hope this posting is OK).
>
>P.S.: I know that I have to buy the HP C development system anyway to
>run gcc.

Why?  I don't have the development system, and gcc runs quite nicely on
the 9000/720 I use.  I miss some libraries and man pages on occasion,
(they are shipped with the full compiler, but they can be had as a
seperate item), but otherwise gcc does everything I need, *especially* if
I'm trying to compile something pulled off the net.

Tim
-- 
Timothy Mooney                                      Not to be confused with 
mooney@beavis.cc.ndsu.nodak.edu                     beavis@mtv.com 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------