On 26 Aug 2003 15:23:59 -0700, aiiadict@hotmail.com (Rich J.) wrote: >Hello group, > >I am getting bored of 6502 and BASIC and I'd like to try a C compiler >for the Apple II. Which ones are the best? If you want to develop in C on a PC, compiling to 6502 code for the Apple, the best solution is CC65 C Compiler. http://www.cc65.org I don't know of any easily-available 6502 C compilers that will actually run on an Apple IIe. Aztec C is one, and I think I have .DSK images for it, but no documentation; the "shell" was a bit cryptic when I tried it. For myself, I use the CC65 C compiler/assembler/linker and develop on the PC side and test using an emulator (AppleWin 1.10.4) // CHRIS In article , Chris Morse wrote: > Running a C compiler on a ~1MHz machine with 64k-128k might be a great > novelty item, Not really.... I did so already 20 years ago. I used BDS C on Apple CP/M -- this was the first C compiler written specifically for an 8-bit environment. Nowadays it's available for free, at: http://www.bdsoft.com/resources/bdsc.html > but if you're going to REALLY be coding in C for the machine, then > use a modern machine for it. It's just so much faster. I disagree --- having a development machine which is different from the target machine slows down the development process quite a bit. > I use Visual Studio 2003 for my development projects, and I love the > "intellisense" that pops up the available functions, properties and > classes available at that point. And debugging is so much better than > the days of Turbo C v1.0 (which I still have an original copy of, > BTW!) :-).... well, of course, since Turbo C v1.0 lacked a debugger, almost anything else (including BDS C!!!) will have better debugging facilities. You could try out Turbo C v2 instead -- it had an integrated debugger, and thus offered debugging facilities far better than those of Turbo C v1.0. Turbo C v2.01 is available for free from the Borland museum: http://community.borland.com/article/images/20841/tc201.zip But of course Visual Studio 2003 has debugging facilities superior to those of Turbo C v2.01 as well --- after all, a big truck can carry a lot more load than a small bicycle.... :-) -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se WWW: http://www.stjarnhimlen.se/ http://home.tiscali.se/pausch/ On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 15:23:59 -0700, Rich J. wrote: > Hello group, > > I am getting bored of 6502 and BASIC and I'd like to try a C compiler > for the Apple II. Which ones are the best? I think the only easily available C compiler that actually runs on the Apple II is Hyper C. It's actually quite nice if you have a hard drive or other "larger" disk. The shell is basically a mini Unix-type shell and it comes with a screen editor that is somewhat similar to Apple Pascal's editor. It is, of course, pretty darn slow on a 1Mhz Apple II, but acceptable if your files aren't too big. -Sheldon Exegete wrote: > According to Call A.P.P.L.E., the best 8 bit C was from Aztec. There > were two, and the article I read favored one over the other, but for the > life of me I can't recall which was which (the names were very similiar) Which issue of Call-A.P.P.L.E. was that review in? I have two Manx Aztec C compilers for Apple II/6502 development. 1. Aztec C65 for the Apple II, version 3.2, July 1986. This runs under ProDOS on an Apple II. 2. Aztec CG65 Cross Development software for 65xx based systems, version 3.2, July 1987. This runs under MS-DOS on a PC. -- Paul R. Santa-Maria Monroe, Michigan USA Paul R. Santa-Maria wrote: > Exegete wrote: > >>According to Call A.P.P.L.E., the best 8 bit C was from Aztec. There >>were two, and the article I read favored one over the other, but for the >>life of me I can't recall which was which (the names were very similiar) > > > Which issue of Call-A.P.P.L.E. was that review in? Volume 12, Number 8 Autumn, 1989 8 Bit Cs reviewed were Aztec C65-c, Aztec C65-p, and C Prime. The Aztec Cs were supposed to be K&R Unix like Cs with Unix like shell and utilities. C65-c was more complete than C65-p, but p had some strengths over c. I hope you can find the article. For 16 bit Cs the reviewer like Orca over APW. Roy > > I have two Manx Aztec C compilers for Apple II/6502 development. > > 1. Aztec C65 for the Apple II, version 3.2, July 1986. > This runs under ProDOS on an Apple II. > > 2. Aztec CG65 Cross Development software for 65xx based systems, > version 3.2, July 1987. This runs under MS-DOS on a PC. > > -- > Paul R. Santa-Maria > Monroe, Michigan USA -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- In article <370265cd.0308261423.24149651@posting.google.com>, Rich J. wrote: > Hello group, > > I am getting bored of 6502 and BASIC and I'd like to try a C compiler > for the Apple II. Which ones are the best? BDS C is definitely the nicest C compiler for 8-bit micros: no other 8-bit C compiler is as fast in compiling, and the generated code runs decently fast as well. It uses a somewhat non-standard syntax and semantics though. BDS C runs under CP/M-80 so you must use it under some version of Apple II CP/M. It was released to the public domain in 2002 and can be downloaded from here: http://www.bdsoft.com/resources/bdsc.html -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se WWW: http://www.stjarnhimlen.se/ http://home.tiscali.se/pausch/