jld@ulysses.UUCP (Jeff David) (09/17/86)
I apologize if this has been discussed before, but I only started playing with IBM clones 2 weeks ago. I was in a bookstore at lunch today and saw a C compiler called "Let's C" by Mark Williams Company. It caught my eye because of the price - it was only $67.50 (retails for $75)! It had quotes from two recent reviews in Byte and PC Tech Journal (favorable, of course). My question: Can it do everything it claims to do - i.e. "Full Kernigan & Ritchie C and extensions; Full UNIX compatibility and complete libraries"? I mean, it seems like a steal next to the MEGABUCKS Microsoft C compiler. Has anybody used Let's C? Anybody like it? Thanks. Jeff David
jnl@inuxh.UUCP (John Le) (09/18/86)
> I apologize if this has been discussed before, but I only started playing > with IBM clones 2 weeks ago. > > I was in a bookstore at lunch today and saw a C compiler called "Let's C" > by Mark Williams Company. It caught my eye because of the price - it was > only $67.50 (retails for $75)! It had quotes from two recent reviews in > Byte and PC Tech Journal (favorable, of course). My question: Can it do > everything it claims to do - i.e. "Full Kernigan & Ritchie C and extensions; > Full UNIX compatibility and complete libraries"? I mean, it seems like a > steal next to the MEGABUCKS Microsoft C compiler. > > Has anybody used Let's C? Anybody like it? Thanks. > > Jeff David No, I haven't used "Let's C" compiler yet. But I think it cannot do bit manipulation and it can only create small memory model (<=64K size). I bought MIX-C compiler earlier this year for $39 (it still costs the same), which includes the compiler on the disk and the manual book. I have used it extensively and love it. At $39 it's a steal. It's an one-pass compiler which compiles and links code quickly (faster than my Microsoft C compiler). I would recommend this MIX-C compiler if you're looking for a low cost, full- feature C compiler. John N. Le (AT&T Consumer Products Laboratories, Indpls, IN) ..!inuxh!jnl
mjb224@uiucuxf.CSO.UIUC.EDU (09/19/86)
I also have the MIX-C Compiler and have found it very complete, very usefull
and VERY VERY SLOW!!! A recent article in PC-Magazine or PC Tech Journal
did a comparison of C compilers and found that the generated code was up to
ten times slower than the Microsoft product. If you can deal with that aspect
(as I was able to) MIX-C is the way to go.
Mike Bruno
Arpanet: mjb224%uiucuxf@a.cs.uiuc.edu
Csnet: mjb224%uiucuxf@uiuc.csnet
Bitnet: mjb224@uiucuxf
UUCP: {ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!uiucuxa!uiucuxf!mjb224
********* Only through December of 1986 **********************dtg@houem.UUCP (F.GRIZMALA) (09/19/86)
I have used most of the C Compilers EXCEPT Let's C. Of all the compilers I have tried, the two I use most often are The Mark Williams C Compiler for my serious work and MIX-C for my "fun" work. MIX-C has its good points and its bad points. The biggest plus it has going for it is the "extra" routines it gives you - ie. the screen functions: clear screen, position cursor, etc. - I wrote these routines using the Mark Williams Compiler but it was not very much fun to do. The biggest drawback to the MIX-C Compiler is that it does not create standard object code and it creates a .COM file rather then a .EXE file. This limits your compiled code to 64K. They do give you a way to "link" these .COM files but it is not very elegant. With me, this limitation provided me with a "fun" challange: to create a full blown data base (I/O screens, add, modify, delete, search on any field(s), etc) in the 64K permitted. While it wasn't easy, it WAS do-able. One little problem I encountered with the MIX Compiler (and there is still much debate between MIX, myself and other users of the Compiler if this is a "problem") is when you have a newline (\n) is a file you are trying to read. If you create a file and do a dir on it, look at the size and then try to read that many characters, you end up with garbage at the end of the file. Reason: the \n counts as two characters to the DOS dir command but only 1 character to the read command. No problem? Just subtract 1 for each newline in the file, adjust your size accordingly (if you have 3 newlines, instead of char inp[33] you use char inp[30] right?). NOW: when you do a lseek you can't use sizeof(inp) because the lseek counts the \n as two characters again. Once you get accustomed to this little problem (they do have a way around this also but again...not very elegant) the MIX-C Compiler is a SUPER Compiler and for the money...everyone should have one.
jsm@vax1.ccs.cornell.edu (Jon Meltzer) (09/20/86)
In article <476@inuxh.UUCP> jnl@inuxh.UUCP (John Le) writes: >> Has anybody used Let's C? Anybody like it? Thanks. >> >> Jeff David > >No, I haven't used "Let's C" compiler yet. But I think it cannot do >bit manipulation and it can only create small memory model (<=64K size). I have it, and John is right. It's limited to the small model. The thing also produces object files in its own , non Microsoft, format, and thus can link only to its own assembler. Dr Dobbs says that the best cheap C is the Datalight Developer's version - $99, Lattice compatible, large memory models.
droye@tdms2.UUCP (Doug Royer) (09/23/86)
>I was in a bookstore at lunch today and saw a C compiler called "Let's C" >by Mark Williams Company. It caught my eye because of the price - it was >only $67.50 (retails for $75)! ........ It is available from 'egghead software' for $54. >My question: > Can it do everything it claims to do - i.e. "Full Kernigan> & Ritchie C > and extensions; Full UNIX compatibility and complete libraries"? ...... > I mean, it seems like a steal next to the MEGABUCKS Microsoft C compiler. Full K&R: Yes + enum and void. Unix Libraries: YES, lots of them. It has something called ececall which is like execev + system, and the stdio library, + more. >Has anybody used Let's C? Anybody like it? Thanks. I have used the Lets C compiler. A friend of mine bought it at a bookstore for $54. This version only supports < 64k memory models. This included examples, egrep, MicroEmacs (with source), assembler, linker (with user made library support). I understand that a development package for around $350 includes the ability to expand past the 64k limit. It also includes a symbolic debugger, and more unix like programs. The same manual is included with both versions, the shaded pages only apply to the development system. -------------------------------------------------- Doug Royer, Hughes Aircraft GSG, Fullerton, CA ...!scgvaxd!droye usenet droyer@ecla arpanet --------------------------------------------------
guest@csustan.UUCP (Chris Rhodes) (09/23/86)
(eat me.) People, This discussion of the various C compilers has been helpful, but I have a question: What are the system requirements for all of these various compilers in terms of disk space? The reason why I ask is because I have only one floppy (!) and a 300k RAMdrive. So, those of you who have worked with a particular compiler, please tell me: can it work with one floppy? how about two? if it's a two-floppy design, can one of the disks be xfered to RAMdisk and still run OK (i.e. would it let you have your compiler in A: and your other stuff in C: or does it need them in a: and b:)? Just for the record, the reason why I only have one floppy is because I just finished putting this thing together myself. Total cost w/8mhz board, case, multifunction card, color card, 640k RAM, keyboard and one floppy was about $550. /* Chris Rhodes / Shooting Shark * Currently cowering behind lll-crg!csustan!guest * real uucp : lll-crg!csuh!shark -or- lll-crg!ptsfa!harlie!shark * My opinions *are* those of csustan! Yeah, they made me spokesman, ah, */ president of the university! Yeah, *that's* the ticket!