jpn@teddy.UUCP (John P. Nelson) (12/07/87)
I just recieved my MSC 5.0 (finally!), and I must say that Quick C is
a disapointment. (I also own Turbo C).
Note that I am not particularly interested in the integrated
environment aspect (I like my own editor, and am comfortable with using
"make"). After running a few test programs through the compiler, it
would appear that:
1. Quick C runs MUCH slower than Turbo C. In fact, it really doesn't
run that much faster than the full MSC 5.0 (at least for small
programs).
2. Code generated by Quick C is ALSO slower than Turbo C.
3. MSC 5.0 does generate pretty fast code if you turn on all optimizing
options, but it is still a VERY SLOW compiler.
Frankly, I can't see any advantage to Quick C at all. It appears that
Microsoft felt threatened by Borland's Turbo C, and tried to address what
they thought Turbo C's greatest strength was (the integrated environment).
However, I like Turbo for it's quick compilation times, and I don't use
the integrated environment AT ALL!
I am currently running some real comparison programs through all three
programs: TCC, QCL, and CL, and generating compile times, run times, and
executable size. I'll post my results here.