On Apr 14, 2:35=A0pm, sc...{at}alfter.DIESPAMMERSDIE.us (Scott Alfter)
wrote:

> There was a bit of a
> learning curve involved in getting cc65 up and running, but I suspect that=

> an ANSI C compiler that (1) is still under somewhat active development and=


What level of compliance is CC65?

> (2) is free-as-in-speech is going to be a better choice for many people th=
an
> a K&R C compiler that (1) hasn't been updated in at least 10 years (maybe =
15
> years or more) and (2) is no longer available except under somewhat
> questionable terms ("abandonware" seems to be the preferred
euphemism).

The latest news is that the terms are probably not questionable but
the definition will need to be finalized before I make an
announcement.

> If you're more familiar with K&R C than with ANSI C, that might not be a
> problem for you. =A0I, on the other hand, started picking up the language =
in
> the early '90s; my copy of K&R is the 2nd edition,and it covers ANSI C.

Since I have been coding in C professionally on an almost daily basis
for about 20 years or so it might be fair to assume that my opinion
might just be worth something.
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32