Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!ucsd!ucsdhub!esosun!seismo!uunet!sco!seanf
From: seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C compilers with integrated preprocessors
Keywords: preprocessor,comments
Message-ID: <1292@scolex>
Date: 19 Sep 88 17:25:11 GMT
References: <5438@techunix.BITNET> <13544@mimsy.UUCP> <779@proxftl.UUCP> <13604@mimsy.UUCP> <3999@bsu-cs.UUCP> <33440@cca.CCA.COM>
Reply-To: seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan)
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Lines: 13

In article <3999@bsu-cs.UUCP> dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
>It is agreed that a Real ANSI-conforming C compiler might not supply a
>separate preprocessor pass, but who cares?  Such a C compiler would be
>an instant commercial failure.

I'm sure Microsoft will be sorry to hear that MSC 4.x and upwards (at least)
and QuickC are doomed to be "an instant commercial failure."  (True, they're
not strictly conforming, yet, but they're trying to get there.)

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "Never underestimate the bandwith of a pickup full of
seanf@sco.UUCP   |     9-track tapes!"  - Eric Green (elg@killer)
(408) 458-1422   | Any opinions expressed are my own, not my employers'.