From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lm@mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2017 17:40:31 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Zilog Z80 Unix In-Reply-To: <20170424000449.GD99987@eureka.lemis.com> References: <19663.1492652562@cesium.clock.org> <20170423001300.GK15459@mcvoy.com> <20170424000449.GD99987@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: <20170424004031.GI24499@mcvoy.com> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:04:49AM +1000, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > On Saturday, 22 April 2017 at 17:13:00 -0700, Larry McVoy wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 07:07:13AM +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote: > >> I remember BDS C for all the wrong reasons; I can only repeat a remark > >> from Henry Spencer about another alleged C compiler: "To be called a C > >> compiler, it ought to at least be able to compile C." My Z-80 C compiler > >> was Hi-Tech C, which was full ANSI. > > > > I've never heard of Hi-Tech C but I am apparently more forgiving. I > > spent many happy hours using BDS C. It wasn't exactly standard, the > > standard I/O library was far from compat, but whatever, it was a C > > compiler on a CP/M system. Pretty pleasant. > > Yes, I think this is a reasonable viewpoint. It was my first ever C > environment, and I really recognized how non-standard it was when I > got a standard C compiler and had to rethink (and rewrite). Yeah, there were hiccups moving but it wasn't hard. > Am I correct in remembering that this was the compiler that Craig > Finseth used for MINCE, my first exposure to (also non-standard) > Emacs? No idea, never heard of MINCE.