heberlei@iris.ucdavis.edu (Todd) (04/10/89)
I've been looking into getting a Mac system recently. I posted some requets earlier about tape drives and got great responses (thanks guys)!! Now for the next question(s): How well does Light Speed C work on the SE/30? Does it support the 68882? Does it treat it just like a 68881? I am planning on only getting 2 MBytes of memory (can I get this config on an SE/30?), can I do everything with LSC on this? Any comments can be mailed to me directly if you don't want to clutter the net, or you can post them (I know comments on compilers and machines often spark debates (ie LSC vs. MPW or Mac vs. IBM)). Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks a lot in advance. -------------- Todd Heberlein heberlei@leek.ucdavis.edu 128.120.57.26
siegel@endor.harvard.edu (Rich Siegel) (04/11/89)
In article <3920@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> heberlei@iris.ucdavis.edu (Todd) writes: > >How well does Light Speed C work on the SE/30? Does it support the >68882? Does it treat it just like a 68881? I am planning on only >getting 2 MBytes of memory (can I get this config on an SE/30?), can I >do everything with LSC on this? THINK C (the new official trademark, if anyone cares) should work fine on a SE/30 (and on a IIcx). Since the '882 is object-compatible with the '881, no special treatment is needed. [And for the purists, you'll have to do the instruction scheduling by hand. :-)] 2MB is the minimum required to use the debugger, but four would be nicer (as it would be even if you WEREN'T using LightspeedC)... --Rich ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Rich Siegel Staff Software Developer Symantec Corporation, Language Products Group Internet: siegel@endor.harvard.edu UUCP: ..harvard!endor!siegel "She told me to make myself comfortable, so I pulled down my pants and sat in the pudding." -Emo Phillips ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
thecloud@dhw68k.cts.com (Ken McLeod) (04/13/89)
In article <1601@husc6.harvard.edu> siegel@endor.UUCP (Rich Siegel) writes: > > THINK C (the new official trademark, if anyone cares) should work Nope. It'll always be "LightspeedC", regardless of what the box says. :-) Is there any truth to the rumor that Crosfield is dropping "Lightspeed" from the name of the next version of its color layout software? Wasn't this the reason for the "THINK C" name in the first place? (Oddly enough, Lightspeed (the color layout program) is compiled with Lightspeed (the C compiler). For that matter, Lightspeed (the C compiler) is compiled with itself!) Seems like *someone* ought to keep the Lightspeed name; it must have some amount of name recognition/marketing value by now! -k -- ========== ....... ============================================= Ken McLeod :. .: UUCP: ...{spsd,zardoz,felix}!dhw68k!thecloud ========== :::.. ..::: INTERNET: thecloud@dhw68k.cts.com //// =============================================