vovut@prism.cs.orst.edu (02/13/91)
Hello, everyone...
Which C compiler is the "best" in terms of support, speed (compared to say
MWC), debugger capabilities, etc.?
I am particularly interested in information about Prospero C, but any
information will be appreciated.
I noticed that some people have Turbo C for the ST. Is Turbo C available
in the US?
Thanks in advance...
vovut@prism.cs.orst.edugaudreau@juggler.East.Sun.COM (Joe Gaudreau - Sun BOS Software) (02/13/91)
vovut@prism.CS.ORST.EDU () writes: > I noticed that some people have Turbo C for the ST. Is Turbo C available > in the US? In the spirit that Commercial vendors aren't supposed to post ad's for themselves BUT users can post hardy recommendations (and I haven't gotten my commission check yet :-), here's an "Ad" for Turbo-C that people might be interested in: Joe -=- From the folks @ Gribnif: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Borland's Turbo C 2.0 for the Atari ST -------------------------------------- For those who don't know, Borland Germany has released a special version of their Turbo C compiler for the Atari ST. The entire compiler and its error messages are in English, with the on-line help and documentation in German. Currently there are no plans for a version with English documentation (though we keep asking). Some of the features of the package include: o Full K & R implementation with ANSI extensions. o Integrated GEM based editing and compiling environment. o Handles both Borland and DRI object file formats. o Libraries for TOS, GEM, Line A, and Borland Graphics Interface functions. o Project manager for efficient compilation of multiple sources. o 68881/2 math co-processor libraries. o Window based source level debugger which allows for stepping, break pointing, logging, and much more. (Package 2 only) o Integrated Lint and Make. o Robust macro assembler which can generate 68000 through 68030 compatible code with full co-processor support. o Turbo fast compiling which generates very tight code. When in Germany at the Atari Fair in Dusseldorf we worked out an agreement with Borland Germany. Under this agreement we would be able to order copies direct from them for programmers in the U.S. and Canada. Two different packages are available: Package1: $160.00 Turbo C 2.0 Compiler Linker Editor [At this time, I think only Package2 is available... Joe] Package2: $275.00 Turbo C 2.0 Compiler Linker Editor Turbo Assembler Turbo Debugger To order, send a check or money order (drawn on a U.S. bank) for the correct amount along with $5 for shipping and handling to: Attn: Turbo C Offer Gribnif Software P.O. Box 350 Hadley, MA 01035 Be sure to include your name, address, and daytime phone number. If you have any questions, please feel free to call us at (413) 584-7887 (also call to use a credit card). We will be keeping you posted on GEnie as to the status of the initial order. Pricing subject to change under extreme exchange rate fluctuations. -----
Roger.Sheppard@bbs.actrix.gen.nz (02/13/91)
Distribution:world In article <1991Feb12.175253.1087@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU> vovut@prism.CS.ORST.EDU () writes: > > > Hello, everyone... > > Which C compiler is the "best" in terms of support, speed (compared to say > MWC), debugger capabilities, etc.? > I am particularly interested in information about Prospero C, but any > information will be appreciated. > I noticed that some people have Turbo C for the ST. Is Turbo C available > in the US? > vovut@prism.cs.orst.edu Turbo C. Well from what I have read Gribnif sells it and has some kind of support for it, there are other dealers in the US as well, some have been posted here, its also claimed that Atari now use it as there standard compiler. There is also Lattice C5, from HiSoft, these two seem to be the best of the C compilers for the Atari. -- Roger W. Sheppard 85 Donovan Rd, Kapiti New Zealand...
neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) (02/14/91)
In article <1991Feb13.020034.654@actrix.gen.nz> Roger.Sheppard@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes: >Turbo C. >Well from what I have read Gribnif sells it and has some kind of >support for it, there are other dealers in the US as well, some have >been posted here, its also claimed that Atari now use it as there >standard compiler. > >There is also Lattice C5, from HiSoft, these two seem to be the best of the C >compilers for the Atari. Does anyone know if these two compilers have any kind of support for DRI link format? I know it's not a great format but it's native to Alcyon C and Sozobon C, imported by Laser C and converted by Mark Williams C. If there is no support for it currently, will ther be in the future? I know that one of the problems with link format support is the calling conventions used. DRI stacks the parameters and use words or longwords. Un*x style would stack only longs and passing paramters in registers would also increase speed. Perhaps these optins are selectable. >Roger W. Sheppard 85 Donovan Rd, Kapiti New Zealand... +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ! DISCLAIMER:Unless otherwise stated, the above comments are entirely my own ! ! ! ! Neil Forsyth JANET: neil@uk.ac.hw.cs ! ! Dept. of Computer Science ARPA: neil@cs.hw.ac.uk ! ! Heriot-Watt University UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!neil ! ! Edinburgh, Scotland, UK "That was never 5 symbols!" ! +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
dc@presto.ruhr.de (David Channing) (02/16/91)
In article <2303@odin.cs.hw.ac.uk> neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) writes: > > >Turbo C. > > > >There is also Lattice C5, from HiSoft, these two seem to be the best of the C > >compilers for the Atari. > > Does anyone know if these two compilers have any kind of support for DRI link > format? Turbo-C supports the DRI format as well as it's own link format. > I know that one of the problems with link format support is the calling > conventions used. DRI stacks the parameters and use words or longwords. > Un*x style would stack only longs and passing paramters in registers would > also increase speed. Perhaps these optins are selectable. Turbo-C normally passes as many parameters as possible in registers. You can turn this off for any function with the declaration 'cdecl'; the parameters are then passed on the stack. -- dc@presto.ruhr.sub.org dc@presto.ruhr.de
dc@presto.ruhr.de (David Channing) (02/17/91)
In article <2303@odin.cs.hw.ac.uk> neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) writes: > > I know that one of the problems with link format support is the calling > conventions used. DRI stacks the parameters and use words or longwords. > Un*x style would stack only longs and passing paramters in registers would > also increase speed. Perhaps these optins are selectable. It's not the job of the linker to generate the code for passing parameters. The compiler should do that. Obviously if you want to link modules from different compilers, they have to agree on where they are going to put/find the parameters. -- dc@presto.ruhr.sub.org dc@presto.ruhr.de
boyd@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (Mickey Boyd) (02/20/91)
In article <1991Feb12.175253.1087@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU>, vovut@prism.CS.ORST.EDU () writes: > > >Hello, everyone... > > Which C compiler is the "best" in terms of support, speed (compared to say > MWC), debugger capabilities, etc.? > > I am particularly interested in information about Prospero C, but any > information will be appreciated. > > I noticed that some people have Turbo C for the ST. Is Turbo C available > in the US? > >Thanks in advance... > >vovut@prism.cs.orst.edu I just read in my newest Current Notes that Prospero is "toning down" their operations in the US. I am unsure how this would bother owners of these compilers, as the company is still going strong in Britain (where it is based). At worst, it would increase the cost of upgrades (postage to/from GB). I am going to purchase Prospero C with my next paycheck, I have seen it for $89. -- Mickey R. Boyd | "God is a comedian playing to an FSU Computer Science | audience too afraid to laugh." Technical Support Group | email: boyd@fsucs.cs.fsu.edu | - Voltaire
pegram@kira.UUCP (Robert B. Pegram) (02/21/91)
From article <1610106@presto.ruhr.de>, by dc@presto.ruhr.de (David Channing): > In article <2303@odin.cs.hw.ac.uk> neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) writes: >> >> >Turbo C. >> > >> >There is also Lattice C5, from HiSoft, these two seem to be the best of the C >> >compilers for the Atari. >> >> Does anyone know if these two compilers have any kind of support for DRI link >> format? > > Turbo-C supports the DRI format as well as it's own link format. > >> I know that one of the problems with link format support is the calling >> conventions used. DRI stacks the parameters and use words or longwords. >> Un*x style would stack only longs and passing paramters in registers would >> also increase speed. Perhaps these optins are selectable. > > Turbo-C normally passes as many parameters as possible in registers. You can > turn this off for any function with the declaration 'cdecl'; the parameters are > then passed on the stack. > > -- > dc@presto.ruhr.sub.org > dc@presto.ruhr.de Lattice C supports only Clink (it's own linker) and the GST format linker - Not DRI. Even so, it claims that the enhanced - with respect to DRI - GST Linker is rather limiting for LC. I only use 'em, I don't know the details of all the differences. Bob Pegram pegram@griffin.uvm.edu or ...!uvm-gen!pegram