Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ll-xn!husc6!bbn!gatech!dcatla!dxjsb
From: dxjsb@dcatla.UUCP (Jack S. Brindle)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: C's that do not impose the 32K global data limit
Keywords: Which ones?  How good are they?
Message-ID: <6622@dcatla.UUCP>
Date: 14 Jul 88 14:42:03 GMT
References: <320@intek01.UUCP> <6319@dcatla.UUCP> <402@dbase.UUCP> <97JyGc6vzM1010WSid.@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
Reply-To: dxjsb@sunb.UUCP (Jack S. Brindle)
Organization: DCA Inc., Alpharetta, GA
Lines: 21

In his followup, kucharsk@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (William Kucharski) writes:

> Where did you get 3.6A?  When I ordered my copy of Aztec C in May (something I
> now pretty much write off as a "live and learn" experience) they sent me 3.4b.

Don't give up yet! I just got version 3.6B yesterday. All I can say is "Oh
my..." They have done a pretty nice job on this one. Two shells come with the
package, the standard Aztec Bourne shell, and the MPW shell! Almost every
Aztec utility will run under both (except the Z editor and the older db
debugger). The C compiler now produces code that is compatible with that from
the MPW system, meaning you can actually use both systems together? 
   OK, before someone says why, try getting the assembler code from MPW C.
Now drop that nice -a option on the Aztec cc line. MUCH easier! And, yes I
do a lot of hand compacting of code. It's actually easier that fresh
assembler, and runs quicker than the C generated code from ANY C compiler.
   The Aztec compiler now uses MPW C's header files, which means that getting
updates may almost be as easy as getting an MPW header update, unless new glue
is needed.
   In short, support problems notwithstanding, Aztec C is still a system that is
worth looking at and working with. We have, however picked up MPW. The two
systems seem to work together.
   Jack Brindle.