Using identifiers with more than 7 chars. #$%@

[Mike I'll be mellow when I'm dead Meyer]

In article <47 at gilbbs.UUCP> mc68020 at gilbbs.UUCP (Tom Keller) writes:
>   ***SHIT***   Mike, what I *SHOULD* have done, it appears, is spend $50K or
>more on a bigger, better system!  There are 2 (count them two) versions of
>UNIX (XENIX) available for the hardware I can *AFFORD*:  2.3a (an unGhodly
>meld of V7 and SysIII), and SYS III.   There is 1 (count it, one!) C compiler
>available for this system/OS combination.   

"Afford" is a nasty word, and how much you pay for your hardware/software
has very little to do with the quality you get. For example, the $150
Lattice C compiler for the Amiga is, in some respects, better than the
4.3BSD C compiler.

As for what runs on cheap hardware, buying a cheap Unix box is probably a
mistake. Unix is a pig, and expecting to get a reasonable Unix system for
under $7K or so is unreal (as far as I know. If you've got one, let me know).
If you spent that much on a Unix system, then you could have gotten either a
4.2 or V.2 system, both of which have flexnames.

I also seriously doubt that there's only C compiler for your system. Given
your username, I'd suggest you call Oasys (617/491-4180) and ask them about
a C compiler.  [Disclaimer: I don't work for Oasys. I don't know anything
about them. I just happened to have seen one of their ads recently.]

I didn't ask you to spend more money than you did, I asked you not  to bitch
at people who  giving you software because you have an inadequate C compiler.
Bitch at your vendor, instead.

If porting the software is a real problem for you, send me email stating
what you want ported and how much you're willing to pay for it. Of course,
if the code isn't readable (someone broke readability in the name of
portability, say), then it's going to be expensive.

	<mike