Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!iscuva!jimc
From: jimc@iscuva.ISCS.COM (Jim Cathey)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Aztec C 3.6c bargain.
Keywords: No "make!"
Message-ID: <1995@iscuva.ISCS.COM>
Date: 22 Sep 88 15:29:01 GMT
References: <10134@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU>
Organization: ISC Systems Corporation, Spokane, WA
Lines: 19

In article <10134@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> earleh@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Earle R. Horton) writes:
>I just acquired Aztec C 3.6c from MacWareHouse for $65.00.  Seems like
>...
>The advertised MPW source-level support is pretty close, too, although
>they do use icky 16-bit ints, and the compiler barfs on MPW C style
>pascal function prototypes.

16-bit ints are not 'icky', and I for one have never had any problem sticking
a (long) in an expression to force it into the 32-bit realm.  I much prefer
the efficiency of the shorter integers, especially since the system will 
usually fully support long arithmetic easily.

The same cannot be said for going the other way (short arithmetic on 
long-integer systems).

Why oh why didn't Apple beat GreenHills profusely about the head and shoulders
to break their Vax mindset????  Now we're forever stuck with "Do you mean
Pascal integers or C integers?"  (Some compilers even have a switch to change
the integer size.  I would accept this solution.)