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.