From: brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill)
Subject: Re: Tidbits about NT and OS/2 from the trade rags.
Date: 5 Oct 92 16:12:00 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

In article <7504@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <19921005.102059.389@almaden.ibm.com> ameline@vnet.ibm.com (Ian Ameline) writes:
>>In article <7494@lib.tmc.edu>,
>>jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>>>I'd be willing to bet a steak dinner that Ian Ameline, or someone from his
>>>shop, has _already_ emailed or spoken to Brian about this statement.
>>   Ooops -- Sorry to let you down -- Didn't see this until now.
>
>Oh well...you can make it up to me by sending me the next CSD for free.
>
>Oh...right. They're _all_ free (at least electronically). I was thinking of MS
>C there. Never mind.

CSD's are "free", but the bugs in C Set/2 are not.  They have cost my 
employer a great deal of my time, and cost me a great deal of stress.
In the 12 or 13 year I've dealt with compilers, never have I had a package
cause me so much trouble.

>
>(Ian, I'll see if I can't break something just so you get to fix it. :-)
>
>>I'll send
>>Brian a note, reminding him that our support group is waiting for any
>>failing programs at CSET2@vnet.ibm.com. We'll be happy to give him a call
>>and do our best to fix any problems that are reported to us.
>
>Ian, once again, you prove my faith in IBM support. (John, if you're watching,
>add another letter to Ian's personnel file. He does good work.) I certainly
>don't expect this kind of participation and support from MS's compiler team.

I wish to add a letter too... Ian has gone above and beyond the call of
duty in trying to help me.  You would not believe the trouble he had
trying to send me CS0014... he got caught in all kinds of typical IBM
bureaucracy.  In the end I got CS0014 from USENET.  Jay, I hope you
realize the "good IBM support" you're so grandly touting was unable
even to FedEx me the CSD.  While Ian (and others) have done as much and
more than anyone could ask...  IBM "support" has let me down for the
7th straight time I have tried it since starting to develop OS/2.  You also
don't seem to say anything about the fact that 3 of 10 programs I
compile with a compiler that has had 14 bug fix releases still fail when
optimized.  This is a ridiculous track record.
If I had a real alternative, I'd be demanding a refund.
Unfortunately I seem to be stuck till Borland gets its product out.

I have given up on WorkSet/2.  I have no time to track through the 3
programs (which quite possibly represent three separate problems) that
fail when compiled with the optimizer turned on.  And I'm not about to
send IBM the entire set of code (I would have to send my whole set of
support libraries too)... so from my standpoint, they'll just have to
do without my input.  I'm dealing with a set of over 100 programs.  I
tried 10, and three failed... I can only assume that yet more would
turn up if I tried the remaining ones.  I don't have time to be IBM's
beta tester for their "released" product.  I'm getting too near the
time where _our_ beta needs to be made stable -- unfortunately this
means I'll need to ship with unoptimised code.  If a customer
notices... well, I'll apologize... but I hope the WorkSet/2 team will
realize what else I'll be telling the customr while I'm giving the ppology.
Imagine how many other places out there will be doing this too!

>Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can

Brian
-- 
C. Brian Sturgill                I strongly encourage you to read Ross Perot's
University of Utah                             United We Stand
Center for Software Science             How we can take back our country.
brian@cs.utah.edu; CIS: 70363,1373  (It's more important than OS/2 vs NT! :-))