CompuServe Thread

#Lat C 5.0 vs 5.1

6 messages in this thread
#118596From: Wayne ColeSep 1, 1990 2:13 PM
Lattice C Users, I recently was "forced" into a situation where I had to acquire a C compiler. A friend who has both Manx and Lattice said Lattice was the way to go. He only got Manx because of some editor that was very much like his favorite Unix editor. Anyway I called Go-Amigo and ordered C 5.1 which I understood was the latest version. They sent 5.0. They claim that was what they recieved from the suppliers less that a week ago and was the "latest" version. I have also read in the forum that some people characterize 5.0 as "useless" due to large numbers of serious bugs. On discussing this with Go-Amiga, they refused to take th product back in its unused condition without a "resotcking fee" (which I feel is not appropriate since they did not send what ai asked for). A call to the Lattice folks got me transferred to a SAS folk who said the upgrade was $40 and that maybe I could get the store to supply it free! (Yeah, right!!) There where some indications that 5.1 is an upgrade available only to 5.0 and not avialable as a seperate package. I called Creative Computer and they said they only had 5.0 at the moment (which is what Go-Amigo SHOULD have told me when I ordered – guess we know who is ahead in the honesty test…). My questions are these: Is it OK to crack the 5.0 and use it or is it really that buggy? Is the additional $40 for the upgrade worth the bug fixes/improvements? Should I return the 5.0 un-opened, fight the restocking fee, and get 5.1 as a complete package (if it is available that way)? Thanks in advance to all the C-farers that can help. wmc
#118651From: Bob RakoskySep 1, 1990 11:30 PM
Wayne, If the version is truly 5.0, then it is a pretty buggy product. The current version (prior to the recent 5.1 upgrade) is 5.05, which I have found to be reasonably stable. All of the upgrades from 5.0 to 5.05 were free (from Lattice). I don't know what SAS's policies are concerning 5.05, or if they are considering them ancient history now that 5.1 has been released. I haven't received the 5.1 upgrade yet (just ordered it), so I can't comment on how good or bad it is. I sure hope you're able to work out this problem — sounds like you've got yourself caught in the middle of a "sticky wicket" here. Hope this helps… …BobR
#118834From: Wayne ColeSep 3, 1990 12:36 AM
Bob, Thanks for the info. The box says 5.0. I haven't cracked it open yet. If I do, where will the revision number be printed/displayed so that I could tell if it is bare 5.0 or 5.0.5? wmc
#118934From: Bob RakoskySep 3, 1990 6:15 PM
Wayne, The revision numbers should (I would hope) be printed on the diskettes, but I'm not positive of this, as I've received upgrades for the subsequent versions (after 5.0) via patches, rather than complete sets of diskettes. However, I do know that if you run the "lc1" and/or "lc2" programs, the first line of text put out print the version number of 5.05. A small word of warning here – the 5.05 version of the "lc" program will only report that it's version 5.04, as it was not changed for the 5.05 upgrade. Many folks have been confused by this. Hope this helps… …BobR White Wolf Productions
#118975From: Jeff SchweigerSep 3, 1990 11:52 PM
Wayne – I purchased Lattice C 5.05 direct from Lattice a few months ago. Short of actually looking at the disk directory, you can't tell which 5.0 version you have from the disk label. If the compiler includes a "readme.505" file, you have the 5.05 version. Another way of checking is by invoking the compiler with an 'lc1' command; it should indicate V5.05 if you have that version (be advised that invoking using 'lc' will indicate 5.04 even if you have 5.05. Jeff Schweiger
#118686From: Don Curtis/SYSOPSep 2, 1990 2:51 AM
Wayne, If it's v5.05, then it should be ok. If it's less than that, then Lattice was supplying the patches to fix it for free…no idea on what SAS's policy is on the patches. Don