#Lattice vs. Manx
9 messages in this thread
Sorry Robert – real programmers could make the Lattice compiler do just
about anything they wanted it to. I had it before there WAS a Manx compiler
– and it generated very nice code, when stroked with the proper cmd line
options for what I was trying to do.
But why should you have to 'stroke' a compiler to get it to generate good
code? Why do you think forcing users to re-write startup code to get good
code size is such a nifty thing? What John Toebes said was if you do this,
and this, and that, and this, and stand on your head, then we'll produce
code comparable to Manx. What he didn't say was with Manx all you say is
'cc prog.c ln prog.o -lc'.
MIke – there is good code that is good because it's small, and there is
good code because it's easily interfaced in a compatible way, and there is
good code because it's maintainable, and there is good code because it's
fast, and there is good code because it's of appropriate structure to
handle data of the size it's designed to deal with, and there is good code
because it's extensible, and there is good code because it's portable.
This "size" thing you're obsessed with is NOT the living end of good code,
nor is speed. In real world projects, most especially those which have to
move/share between multiple (clever, inventive etc) developers, those other
issues become paramount because the end products _effects_ are the issue,
and that we can maintain and support and extend those effects are the next
important issue.
Ben,
Oh, boy, here's my chance!
And I had Lattice before there was Manx, too. Only trouble was … that
about half the stuff I ran through it showed serious code generation bugs –
you know, the ones the compiler can't tell you about – that take a while to
find? Sure, maybe I had a bad version, but I wrote to Lattice and then
only after 6 weeks and a second letter and a phone call did they give me
the courtesy of a reply. And they said I'd have to BUY an upgrade, at
$130.00, to get a working version. So I bought Manx. The full product.
And it worked. So, thanks, but I'll stick with a company that puts out a
product and stands behind it. (And I got a free upgrade within the year
that I bought it.)
Now I have Manx 5.0a. It has a few bugs but … I have every reason to
believe that I'll receive an upgrade (are you listening, Mike?).
When are these guys going to realize that they get a lot of sales from
people who are referred to products by current users? Since my episode
with Lattice … I've always recommended Manx. Same reason I recommend
WordPerfect. After over a year with their initial release, and I called
them with a problem, they sent me a *FREE* upgrade. That's what I call
value.
🙂
Jerry. (W A 2 J F J)
Sounds like you had some problems, alright, and support is a big issue.
Luckily for me, I've always received quick, courteous upgrades, and I've
had only a couple of problems in the almost 5 years I've been using the
Lattice compiler. As for recommending Word Perfect, I see we disagree
across the board. My feeling on that issue was and is that WP is a
non-Amiga product that has been poorly ported, was for MUCH longer than
either compiler simply replete with bugs, and is slow as death. It's very
full featured, true… but the rest outweighs that for me. I _never_
recommend it.
WP has, in the time that I used it, trashed my hard drive, wandered text
all over the screen, placed the cursor on the wrong line (IE you type, it
appears in the line ABOVE where you wanted it), and the printer output
stuff rarely seems to function correctly (the HP Laser driver is what we
use). A lot of this got fixed, after over a year of b*tching, but in that
time I developed an "attitude", and don't plan to bother with the product
any more.
As for Lattices code generation, I've put out a number of major
applications in terms of code size, and as I say I've rarely had any
problem at all. This may well be due to the highly structured manner in
which I utilize the compiler, but whatever, it's worked for me and
splendidly. I have no problem recommending it.
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
Ben,
I agree, WP ain't perfect. However, after some of the service I've seen
in this industry, I was impressed with the company. For really big
projects I prefer to use our own product we developed at our company – it's
much easier to use and handles large documents better. But for what I use
it for, WP is fine, and again, I've been impressed with their service
attitude.
I've done some pretty significant projects with Manx, too. Up through
3.6, I had no problem at all. I, too, use a pretty structured approach to
my work.
I welcome the function prototyping capability with 5.0. It's a really
necessary feature when using the compiler with 16-bit ints, especially when
running some of the PD or other people's stuff through it. I almost always
use type aliases with my stuff, but you still can get in trouble with the
library functions in a weak moment.
73,
Jerry (WA2JFJ)
WP's service, in terms of bug fixes has been so-so. THeir customer support,
otoh, is _excellent_ in my experience. The product, again, IMHO, is very
poor.
I don't get in trouble with function prototypes, generally, because i use
32 bits almost exclusively.
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
Ben,
I don't use WP, but for a different reason. I am forced to use it at work,
and unless you use it all the time, it is a bear to remember how to do even
simple things. My problem is that I don't need a sophisticated
tech-writer's tools to compose a simple memo. BTW, we just installed WP5.1
at work, and it now has pull-down menus. What a novel idea! 😉
Marcus
You should be getting your 5.0b update notice very soon….
-Mike