[comp.sys.amiga] Lattice 4.0 versus Manx 3.4, and Monitors

craig@unicus.UUCP (Craig D. Hubley) (12/12/87)

With two relatively new compilers around, it's time to get into flame wars:

Who has used Lattice C 4.0 and/or Manx C 3.4 ?  

Lattice, in their ads, claim:

		Lattice 4.0			Manx 3.40
		-----------			---------
		1294 Dhrystones	versus 		1010
		IEEE Float in 22.2 s	versus 	98.85 s
		FFP Float in 10.16 s 	versus	17.60 s
		IEEE Savage in 47.67 s	versus	119.6 s
			at .000000318		at .000109
			accuracy		accuracy

Of course, these will be lies, but what's the truth of the matter ?
I know the Amiga Transactor is planning a comparison of the two, 
but in the meantime, what's the experience of netters ?

Even if Lattice does perform better in the above tests,
that says nothing about the quality of their libraries, other than FP,
which I am told has always been abysmal.

And of course Manx still has a source level debugger, and I have no
idea if Lattice plans one in the near future.  Any comments ?

Absolutely no flames about older Lattice or Manx versions!  With one
exception:	does code that compiles properly under them break under
		the new compilers ?

And how easy is it, now, to port between the two ?

Unrelated question:
------------------
How, exactly, does the Commodore monochrome monitor work ?

Worst case:
	outputs four screens arranged 512x400 or 1024x200 to produce one
	picture.  Takes much time to do this, and is very long persistence.
	Text smear worse than a six year old with a peanut butter sandwich
	reading your tabloid newspaper on a hot day.	

Best case:
	Something I haven't thought of yet.

George?

If the worst case above is not the answer, when will it be available ?
If it is, I really don't care. 

peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) (12/22/87)

First of all, the latest Manx (so new it's not even here yet :->) is 3.6,
not 3.4. The source level debugger is a 3.6 enhancement.

Secondly, forget benchmarks. I'm sure you could come up with a Seive
that used the blitter. Does that mean the Amiga as a 10 MIPS machine?
Take a real program and compare its speed under both. I'd suggest something
large, portable, and CPU-bound. Like ADVSYS.

Finally, what features do the two variants give you? What features do you
want?

As for the monitor, I believe it takes a 4 bitplane screen, pulls out the
bitplanes, and sticks them next to each other. Suitably scrolled, of course,
so they all fit into one bitmap.
-- 
-- Peter da Silva  `-_-'  ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter
-- Disclaimer: These U aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.