From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!uwvax!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!cuae2!killer!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: "C" vrs ADA
Message-ID: <584@sugar.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 28-Aug-87 11:51:46 EDT
Article-I.D.: sugar.584
Posted: Fri Aug 28 11:51:46 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 30-Aug-87 08:58:55 EDT
References: <1065@vu-vlsi.UUCP> <12513@clyde.ATT.COM>, <203@trwrc.UUCP> <138@kesmai.COM>
Organization: Sugar Land UNIX - Houston, TX
Keywords: Any suggestions?
Summary: The runtime must be a dog 'cos VAX 'C' is...
Xref: mnetor comp.lang.ada:607 comp.lang.c:4027
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <138@kesmai.COM>, dca@kesmai.COM (David C. Albrecht) writes:
> Well then if DEC is unenthusiastic about C the people responsible for unix
> (B&B) must be somnabulistic since the VAX C compiler beats the pants
> off of pcc.

If the VAX 'C' compiler (presumably the gode gen) beats the pants off PCC,
the runtime must be a DOG. VAX 'C' is the worst 'C' development environment
it has ever been my misfortune to work under, both because of the poor
support for VMS in VAX C, and because of the incredibly poor performance
of the resulting programs. I'll take BDS 'C' for the Z80 any day over
DEC's "product".

DEC has indeed been unenthusiastic about 'C', and anything else to do
with UNIX. The old NIH syndrome.
-- 
-- Peter da Silva `-_-' ...!seismo!soma!uhnix1!sugar!peter
--                  U   <--- not a copyrighted cartoon :->