|
|
Keith Thompson wrote:
<snip>
> Chuck specifically said that the "only real purpose" of TC2.01 is to
> check portability to 16 bit systems. If you want to make sure that
> your code doesn't implicitly assume that INT_MAX is 2**31-1, and
> doesn't break if INT_MAX is 2**15-1, then TC2.01 would seem to be a
> reasonable tool for that specialized job (I assume; I've never used it
> myself). If that's not something you happen to need, that's fine, but
> then I don't quite see the point of your response.
I was arguing the point that, as I see it, the possibility of checking
for certain portability violations does not seem to be a strong enough
reason to use Turbo C, when you have freely available, more standards
conformant implementations that compile code for systems that are more
widely used than DOS.
Yes, in can be used, but I only see it disappearing increasingly, both
courtesy of heavy marketing by MS and existence of other free
alternatives.
|
|