[comp.sys.misc] Good C and Lint for RMX86

jsingh@cive.ri.cmu.edu (J S Singh) (10/22/88)

We are looking for a decent C compiler and if possible 'lint' to
run under a native RMX86 environment.  We do all our development
on 310 workstations using 28612 processors.

Can anyone recommend one give us pointers to a company that makes
such products?


Jeff Singh
Field Robotics Center
Carnegie Mellon University

tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (10/24/88)

In article <3371@pt.cs.cmu.edu> jsingh@cive.ri.cmu.edu (J S Singh) writes:
>We are looking for a decent C compiler and if possible 'lint' to
>run under a native RMX86 environment.  We do all our development
>on 310 workstations using 28612 processors.

HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW!!!
  HEE HEE HEE HEE!!!
    YUK YUK YAHOOOEY!!!!

    <snuffle> <chuckle>

Please, please forgive me that outburst.  Welcome to the club!  We
would *ALL* dearly love a decent C compiler for iRMX86 etc.  As you are
probably aware "Intel C" is a port of Mark Williams <shudder> C 1.0
from about 1984.  And it's a joke.  Code generation execrable, runtime
nearly nonexistent, portability rating near zero.

The reason Intel hasn't done anything to improve the situation is that
the people who really care about things like C at Intel have GIVEN UP
on iRMX completely, and all work on DOS, Unix or Xenix now.  Nothing
like vendor loyalty, huh.

If you want the "good" news, rumor has it Intel will someday release
their OWN C based on the PL/M-?86 v2.7-and-later code generator.  This
will get the performance out of the gutter, but whether it will be
ANSI or even close is anyone's guess.

Please, if you find a third party selling a C compiler that generates
code LINK86 can handle, LET ME KNOW at the address in my signature.
However I am not hopeful.

PS for whatever your target is -- do you have to use C?  I use PL/M-86
all the time with excellent results.
-- 
Tom Neff			UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff
	"None of your toys	CIS: 76556,2536	       MCI: TNEFF
	 will function..."	GEnie: TOMNEFF	       BIX: t.neff (no kidding)

beres@cadnetix.COM (Tim Beres) (10/26/88)

In article <7144@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes:
>In article <3371@pt.cs.cmu.edu> jsingh@cive.ri.cmu.edu (J S Singh) writes:
>>We are looking for a decent C compiler and if possible 'lint' to
>>run under a native RMX86 environment.  We do all our development
>>on 310 workstations using 28612 processors.
>
>If you want the "good" news, rumor has it Intel will someday release
>their OWN C based on the PL/M-?86 v2.7-and-later code generator.  This
>will get the performance out of the gutter, but whether it will be
>ANSI or even close is anyone's guess.
>
For what it's worth, I used to be an Intel FAE-like creature.  What we
(creatures) were told at Intel training is that yes, indeed, an Intel
developed C compiler with a common front end, and per target (x86) back
ends was forthcoming.  In fact, the code generator portion was supposed
to be common for C,Ada,PL/M...As to your question about decent C's for
Intel:  Yep, they are out there.  The problem, at least then (year ago),
was that you couldn't use LINK86, I2ICE, etc from Intel because they
didn't use the OMF.  This pretty much rules out RMX86.  I would, 
however, be very willing to bet that there is something out there, but
since I pay very little attention to RMX et al, I don't know the facts.

So check out periodicals, iRUG, competing ICE manufacturers (Applied
Microsystems might know for instance) and Intel for when the new C
will happen.  BTW, it should have started happening by now from what I
remember.  Not the first late piece of software.

>PS for whatever your target is -- do you have to use C?  I use PL/M-86
>all the time with excellent results.

Except for strings.  Have you done any kind of decent library for messing
with them?  Other than strings, it was definitely fast, usable and bug 
free.

>Tom Neff			UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff


			Tim Beres
------>MY SOAPBOX (not necessarily my co.'s, yours or ALF's)
    If it weren't for packaging - McDonalds, Victoria's Secret and George
    			Bush would be nothing.
Tim Beres   beres@cadnetix.com  {uunet,boulder,nbires}!cadnetix!beres

doug@dhw68k.cts.com (Doug Salot) (11/02/88)

In article <7258@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes:
>                            OF COURSE if you wanted a C compiler that
>generated *some* kind of 8086 code not in OMF format, you have had
>numerous commercial PC choices for years... Lattice, Aztec, MS, Borland
>etc.

I believe that SSI (Costa Mesa, CA 714/241-8650) and Pharlap (I dunno
where) have tools that will allow you to use Microsoft object generating
compilers/assemblers for OMF environments.  I haven't had the chance
to use either of the products extensively, so I can't make any claim
as to their usefulness.

Disclaimer: I'm currently working on an unrelated project for SSI.
-- 
doug@feedme.UUCP | doug%feedme@dhw68k.cts.com | uunet!ccicpg!zardoz!feedme!doug

rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson) (11/05/88)

In article <14386@dhw68k.cts.com> doug@dhw68k.cts.com (Doug Salot) writes:
>I believe that SSI (Costa Mesa, CA 714/241-8650) and Pharlap (I dunno
>where) have tools that will allow you to use Microsoft object generating
>compilers/assemblers for OMF environments.  I haven't had the chance
>to use either of the products extensively, so I can't make any claim
>as to their usefulness.

I used the Pharlap stuff to convert MSC to OMF back in June '88.  At that
time it was strictly global variables and functions as far as symbols
go.  No types, lines numbers, or locals.  I gave the person at Pharlap
a sample of the output of a COFF to OMF converter I wrote which did
handle line numbers and some types, so it is quite likely that they
have improved the functionality for MSC .OBJ's.

Pharlap was very responsive, as I recall.  They had some trouble
initially with ICE86, which is why I sent samples of COFF converted
to OMF.  The older ICE's make assumptions about OMF that aren't
necessarily true unless you use Intel language products.  I had
already beat my head on this one in making the COFF converter.

-- 
Rick Richardson | JetRoff "di"-troff to LaserJet Postprocessor|uunet!pcrat!dry2
PC Research,Inc.| Mail: uunet!pcrat!jetroff; For anon uucp do:|for Dhrystone 2
uunet!pcrat!rick| uucp jetroff!~jetuucp/file_list ~nuucp/.    |submission forms.
jetroff Wk2200-0300,Sa,Su ACU {2400,PEP19200} 12013898963 "" \r ogin: jetuucp