Turbo C++ 3.0 bugs
vax9000 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 14 11:13:06 CST 2005
On 12/14/05, mbbrutman-cctalk at brutman.com <mbbrutman-cctalk at brutman.com> wrote:
> Quoting 9000 VAX <vax9000 at gmail.com>:
> > I met a problem in Watcom C 11.0. I uses wcl which makes 8086 code.
> > The code is running on a 386. I got wired result with
> > printf("%x %x %x ",inportb(H_ADDR2), inportb(H_ADDR1), inportb(H_ADDR0));
> > but the following code worked as expected,
> > printf("%x ", inportb(H_ADDR2));
> > printf("%x ",inportb(H_ADDR1));
> > printf("%x ", inportb(H_ADDR0));
> > The hardware is straightforward and unlikely to have problem. I don't
> > have time to determine the real source of this problem, though.
> > vax, 9000
> In general, how is Watcom C 11.0 compared to Turbo C++ 3.0? Am I hurting myself
> unnecessarily using Turbo C++?
Faster, more compact code; can produce both 8086 executable and 80386
executable. I used it to run SIMH(386 mode) and now I use it's 8086
mode to compile software derived from SIMH. The only problem is that I
don't have software to make EPROM image that supports Watcom file
I use Watcom C 11 because it is open and free. TC2.01 is free (price)
but it can't handle // style comments or 64 bit long word. TC has a
more convenient IDE. I use TC2.01 to write short test programs.
More information about the cctalk