From: comeau@csanta.attmail.com (Greg Comeau)
Subject: Re: Why no ANSI C compiler?
Originator: comeau@well.sf.ca.us
Reply-To: comeau@csanta.attmail.com (Greg Comeau)
Organization: Comeau Computing
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 05:38:12 GMT

In article <9212235958@drktowr.chi.il.us> magus@drktowr.chi.il.us (Louis Giliberto) writes:
>Greg Comeau (comeau@csanta.attmail.com) wrote:
>: In article <9212135427@drktowr.chi.il.us> magus@drktowr.chi.il.us (Louis Giliberto) writes:
>: >There is one rule to programming you will learn very quickly:
>: >THERE ARE NO STANDARDS WHEN IT COMES TO C
>: 
>: That is most certainly an overstatement.
>
>Is it?  Show me two compilers that will interpret a reasonable length program
>in the same way.

That in and of itself doesn't confirm or deny C standards.
Personally I've ported hundreds of thousands of lines of C code
to different systems/compilers and in many cases had to change nothing.
Not in every case (but I didn't say that).  And the situation has gotten
exponentially better over the past 5 years.

>  And if you're interfacing assembly language inline
>with the C, optimizations and legal register usage is a nightmare.

That's true of most languages, but why are you singling out C here?   And what
does that have to do with C standards, or lack thereof?

> But sticking
>just with the ANSI specs for the language, there still is a lot of stuff left
>up to the implementer.

Absolutely.  A lot of stuff.

>: >C++ is even worse.
>: 
>: I'll disagree strongly.  C++ has and will always continue to be more standard
>: than C.
>
>???? 1) There is no ANSI standard for C++, and 2) most C++ compilers don't
>to the current Cfront spec. But, maybe you're right...I dunno.

There is an ANSI C++ committee for some 2+ years now and much progress has
been made on a working draft document.  Although there has been eveolution
in the C++ spec and implementations, it is MO that C++ has and will continue
to be more standard than C.

>: It won't be cfront 3 compatible.  Various aspect of it will be up to date
>: though.  Of course there is Comeau C++ (literally cfront 3, currently being
>: 3.0.1'ized on our other platforms, and to be 3.0.2'ized 1Q93), but as I just
>: mentioned in my previous message, we have been awaiting resolution of a number
>: of problems from MWC for quite some number of months now.
>
>But who would pay >$200 for a compiler on a $99 OS?  The point is this:
>most people have Coherent as a hobby/homework system.  If they were willing
>to spend a couple of hundred on a second-company compiler, they would
>probably be willing to spend a grand on the OS.
>
>Maybe your market research knows something I don't.  I wish ya luck with
>it, but I'm not so sure it will fly.

Thank you for your perspective.  We didn't know for sure initially either
but given the number of back orders we currently have, the pile of letters
and faxes from around the globe, our phone logs, all from people wanting
the high quality of Comeau C++, I can now say with certainty that quite
a number of people are not feeling that it will not fly.  I can't
explain it, and I'm sure every COHERENT customer will not order
Comeau C++ (nor will every one order  any alternative either though),
but enough have and will continue to.  (This is fact).

- Greg
-- 
         Comeau Computing, 91-34 120th Street, Richmond Hill, NY, 11418
                   Producers of Comeau C++ 3.0 With Templates
          Here:attmail.com!csanta!comeau / BIX:comeau / CIS:72331,3421
	    Voice:718-945-0009 / Fax:718-441-2310 / Prodigy: tshp50a