tmb@davinci.acc.Virginia.EDU (Thomas M. Breeden) (05/30/90)
I've been seeing a lot of good words for the JPI M2 compiler for PC compatibles. Does anyone have experience and/or opinions about the Stony Brook compiler? Tom Breeden tmb@virginia.edu -->> Internet tmb@virginia -->> BITNET
rogerson@PEDEV.Columbia.NCR.COM (Dale Rogerson) (05/31/90)
In article <1990May30.125042.2573@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> tmb@davinci.acc.Virginia.EDU (Thomas M. Breeden) writes: >I've been seeing a lot of good words for the JPI M2 compiler for >PC compatibles. Does anyone have experience and/or opinions about >the Stony Brook compiler? I have used the Stony Brook Modula2 Compiler and I like it. One of the best things about it from my point of view is that it supports MS Windows programming. It also works with OS/2, in fact when you buy the Professional Compiler (i.e. the optimizing compiler) you really get four compilers: QuickMod for DOS, QuickMod for OS/2, Optimizing Compiler for DOS, and the Optimizing Compiler for OS/2. All of their compilers can be run from an environment which is helpful and quite nice to work with. The compiler is fast and produces some of the best code found for both Modula 2 and C compilers at least according to some of the magazine reviews. I have not had a chance to try out the JPI Modula 2 but the Stony Brook compiler is a lot better than the Logitech compiler. In fact I heard a rumor that Logitech was going to stop producing its own compiler and sell the Stony Brook compiler instead. In general I really like the Stony Brook compiler. If you have any questions about it I will be happy to try to answer them. -----Dale Rogerson-----