| ??? 12/05/07 19:29 Read: times |
#147912 - Have you considered PLM2C? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
I was looking through some old Old OLD archives and found a utility called PLM2C which apparently does what its title implies. There was, IIRC, also a C2PLM utility, though I could be mistaken about that. I don't know anything about these, aside from the context in which I found 'em, which was CP/M.
Perhaps that will be of some use ... RE |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| How to write portable code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C is a language - not a compiler | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| PL/M | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Have you considered PLM2C? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| A good point - often missed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| So what's the downside? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Complex code - Libraries | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| COTS libraries versus inhouse libraries | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Hence portability is not such a big issue! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| There are downsides | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Portability vs. Readability/Maintainability. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| who gives a hoot about portability | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Portable by BIOS | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I give a hoot about portability | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I am definitely not arguing against "code reuse" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| HAL | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Small and easy things that may make Your day | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The developer is probably the biggest factor | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I may take issue with this one... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
general re 'portable code' | 01/01/70 00:00 |