Suggestions

[Tony van der Hoff]

On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, at 17:35:35, Tom Hughes <tom at compton.nu> wrote on
the subject "Suggestions":

>In message <502H1IAfpWB5EwR1 at mk-net.demon.co.uk>
>          Tony van der Hoff <OSLib at mk-net.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, at 23:24:29, Tom Hughes <tom at compton.nu> wrote on
>> the subject "Suggestions":
>>
>> 2. It is an excellent compiler, albeit a bit long in the tooth, but that
>> doesn't matter. I believe that Norcroft *is* falling into disuse on this
>> platform (because the average person can't buy it?) as people migrate
>> onto gcc and c++. I could be wrong, and probably am ;-)
>
>I would have thought that people would need a reason to move - unless
>there is a pressing need for C99 features why would anybody move? An
>unmaintained compiler is only an issue if there are major bugs that
>need fixing and in my experience Norcroft has very few.
>

It's not so much a question of those who already have the compiler
moving, but of those new to developing for the platform not having
anything else. Wastage as existing Norcroft users move away from the
platform means that there will be a natural shift to other tools.

The other reason is the declining popularity of C in favour of C++. (All
IMHO, of course, I don't really want to start a religious war here :-)
If you decide to use the g++ compiler, you're likely to use that for any
C work. I suspect the better code efficiency from Norcroft is only going
to tip the balance for a very few developers.

As Stewart points out good old Norcroft has still got the edge in some
areas; and he even gives us some hope for the future.

Still, it doesn't matter for OSLib; I'm quite happy to leave __SWI
alone, and that was the reason this discussion started.
-- 
Tony van der Hoff         |  Mailto:tony at mk-net.demon.co.uk
                          |  Mailto:avanderhoff at iee.org
Buckinghamshire, England  |  http:www.mk-net.demon.co.uk