Michael I Yawn wrote:
>
> The combination of this, and the command line length limitation you
> mentioned in an earlier message, were enough to drive me from
> c89 to gcc.  gcc handles -o properly, doesn't have the command
> line limitations, supports 64 bit (long long) integers,
> and has quite a few other features lacking from c89.
>
Come to think of it, this is soooo funny ... HP engineers using a
freeware compiler because their 'own' compiler lacks in functionality..
I suppose c89 is not made by HP either, it's a MKS special, right ?

Anyway, I did contemplate switching to gcc too. Just not too sure of
the consequences. How are your experiences with gcc as replacing c89 ?
Any gotchas ? E.g. what about MPE intrinsics ?
Will gcc be bundled with MPE one day ?

TIA
--
Kind regards,

        Chris Breemer           [log in to unmask]
        Compuware Europe B.V.   http://www.compuware.com