lesh@BRL.ARPA (ISC | howard) (12/02/86)
Thanks to all for responses to my query. I thought I'd pass on the results of phone conversations with two CP/M 80 C compiler vendors. 1) the latest release of Aztec C is 1.06d. According to the vendor, it is System V compatible with respect to all the pre-processor directives (I didn't ask whether they had bit-fields yet). (The pre-processor stuff is important if you like Fred Fish's DBUG program posted on the network a little while ago.) 2) the latest release of the Eco-C compiler is 3.47. They too men- tioned support for System V pre-processor directives. The person I talked to would not guarentee that a "bug" I was told was in their CP/M 80 C compiler had been fixed. (He says that K&R say that there is supposed to be a space between the function name and the left paran.) (or at least that there is some scripture somewhere which justifies their not making a change) Thanks again for your replies. We still have not made any commit- ments so any additional information will be appreciated.
jon@amc.UUCP (Jon Mandrell) (12/03/86)
In article <1211@brl-adm.ARPA> lesh@BRL.ARPA (ISC | howard) writes: >2) the latest release of the Eco-C compiler is 3.47. They too men- > tioned support for System V pre-processor directives. The person > I talked to would not guarentee that a "bug" I was told was in > their CP/M 80 C compiler had been fixed. (He says that K&R say > that there is supposed to be a space between the function name and > the left paran.) > (or at least that there is some scripture somewhere which justifies > their not making a change) I think this is backwards. I use ECO-C (version 3.10) and you can NOT place a space between the function call and the open paren. K&R does NOT say that a space is valid, but they never say that it isn't. -- Jon Mandrell (ihnp4!uw-beaver!tikal!amc!jon) Applied Microsystems Corp. "flames >& /dev/null" - me