Jonathan Cunningham (jlc@bmtech.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: I know *of* a version in development, but the guy who told
: me about it asked me not to say who, since he is developing
: it in his spare time (and doesn't want to be hassled).
: (BTW, where's the betatest version I was promised :-).
That's interesting. I was thinking about that myself. It shouldn't be too hard
to write the compiler part. Because of the user stack thingy the code
generation could be quite simple. I suspect it is somewhat more difficult to
write one that generates efficient syspop, but what the hell. The run time
environment is would be harder. The worst thing would be re-writing all the
libraries that come with poplog. I suppose it depends on how compatible with
poplog-pop11 you'd want it to be.
: There are also ports of Poplog that will run on PC hardware,
: but I guess they cost.
There is a beta of the Linux port. I works as well, but only on an X display.
Richard
|