In refd article, kers@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Chris Dollin) writes:
>In article ... ianr@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Ian Rogers) writes:
>
> There will be no MSDOS or Mac version of Pop11 without an
> identifiable, sufficient subset of Pop11 commands and syntax. This
> is why Pepper and GLOW have occurred!
>
>I can't speak for GLOW, but that *isn't* why I designed and (proto) implemented
>Pepper.
Nor do I see any reason why it should be so. Anybody?
Having been hacking in 'C' for the last ..cough.. years I can't understand
why there wasn't a 'C' implementation of POP done a long time ago.
I hope the work on Pepper is being done in a portable fashion.
--
Ray Dunn at home | Beaconsfield, Quebec | Phone: (514) 630 3749
ray@philmtl.philips.ca | ray@cam.org | uunet!sobeco!philmtl!ray
|