|  |     Microsoft has enhanced its version of C and they now call it Quick
    C.  It is supposed to be a nice development environment, I've haven't
    had a chance to use it yet though.
    
    Borland has a version called, as one would guess, Turbo C that works
    under MS-DOS.  I have used it and found it to be a good development
    tool.  
    
    Hope this helps 
    
    Oliva
 | 
|  |     
    
    Re .4:
    
    
    Opps you're right - Quick C was added to MS C not vice versa, my
    apologies.  As to how good an answer it is to Borland's Turbo C, 
    I really couldn't say as when I was using Turbo C, Quick C had yet
    to be released.
    
    My point, however, was that there is an alternative to Ms C available.
    
    Oliva
      
 | 
|  |     Manx Aztec C has done quite well in the benchmarks, although their
    source debugger is of the old glass-teletype style (like VAX Debug in
    line mode) and lacks watchpoints.  Its big drawback is the pricetag
    ($500 for the version with the library sources, although my wife got
    hers through a sub-license for $189).  I've been told it is the closest
    in many ways to Unix.  It's also available on the Mac, Amiga, and Atari
    (at a much lower price!) if you like the Motorola architecture better. 
    
    Let's C (from Mark Williams) has a nice symbolic debugger (csd)
    but the code speed isn't production quality, and it doesn't have
    that hard-to-describe solid feel of a professional tool.  (There
    may be a Let's C for the Mac.  I don't recall.)
        
    Turbo C has a generous library but no debugger whatsoever so you're
    stuck with strategic printf's.  (With 1.5, you even get reasonable
    adapter-independent graphics for "free".)  It's code speed is probably
    quite similar to Let's C, although I've never benchmarked them.  I've
    read rumors either in the trade press or on a BBS that Borland is
    working on a hot new debugger, but I don't remember where I read it... 
    We have all three, and all three seem to generate acceptable code.
    
    We don't have Microsoft-C, but if we're serious about ever getting into
    C++, we'll probably have to buy Microsoft-C or at least Codeview
    sometime soon.  (All the precompilers assume Microsoft-C or Lattice-C
    and do debug using Codeview.  This looks like a general trend.)  I've
    resisted so far because I hate having to pay a premium price to buy
    software from the people who made the operating system.  (Of course, I
    don't see any problem with folks doing the same thing on VAXen. :-) ) 
    Meanwhile, we've gone off and bought Smalltalk/V and an Ada compiler
    for it, but that's the topic for another note... 
    
    							Ralph
 |