[comp.lang.modula2] TOPSPEED M-2

big_al@RAMSEY.CS.LAURENTIAN.CA ("Alain M. Gaudrault") (05/08/91)

        Awhile ago, I'd heard TopSpeed's Modula-2 compiler had some a pretty
serious flaw in its handling of a DOS interrupt.  I'm not quite sure exactly
what the problem was, but I'm wondering if anyone out there does.  Does
the new version fix this bug?
        The adds for TopSpeed's new version says the Windows 3.0 platform is
supported: any details about this?  Are they including the Windows SDK like
Borland is (Whitewater Resource Toolkit) with their Borland C++?  Does the
Windows 3.0 version run as a Windows application?  Don't spare the details,
please!
        Finally, what IS Smartlink?  The add I've seen is pretty lame in that
NO DETAILS about any enhancements made are given.  Information would be much
appreciated.
        By the way, is JPI going to be sending out info packages to its
registered users about the new products?  Sure hope so.

Just another spirit on parole,
                                                     Big Al the Devil's Pal!!

Kaare.Rasmussen@f15.n231.z2.fidonet.org (Kaare Rasmussen) (05/23/91)

Hi Ben

 BC> sold as a separate package, which includes support for DOS DLL's, the TS

Also includes is a memory model that should make you able to use 16 MB of
memory - i suppose it is something like Borland's VROOM.

 BC> features of the Microsoft SDK may be required.  Consult JPI for
 BC> details".

I did - and talked to a nice guy who had been working on the help system. He
told me that JPI more or less provided the same as Borland, but didn't
advertise as heavily. E.g. to debug a Windows program, they still recommend
CodeView. Said also, that Borland ought to do the same. In a recent
discussion on the danish C-echo, it was generally agreed that CodeView WAS
needed for heavy development.

Regards, Kaare


--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!2!231!15!Kaare.Rasmussen
Internet: Kaare.Rasmussen@f15.n231.z2.fidonet.org

nevries@cs.ruu.nl (Nico de Vries) (05/27/91)

In <8865.283FCDA5@puddle.fidonet.org> Kaare.Rasmussen@f15.n231.z2.fidonet.org (Kaare Rasmussen) writes:

>Hi Ben
>
> BC> sold as a separate package, which includes support for DOS DLL's, the TS
>
Wrong VROOMM is superior to DLL's.
>Also includes is a memory model that should make you able to use 16 MB of
>memory - i suppose it is something like Borland's VROOM.
>
> BC> features of the Microsoft SDK may be required.  Consult JPI for
> BC> details".
>
>I did - and talked to a nice guy who had been working on the help system. He
>told me that JPI more or less provided the same as Borland, but didn't
>advertise as heavily. E.g. to debug a Windows program, they still recommend
TD386 and TD for windows are far superior tho CodeView (even the latest
version with single monitor support. 
>CodeView. Said also, that Borland ought to do the same. In a recent
>discussion on the danish C-echo, it was generally agreed that CodeView WAS
>needed for heavy development.
>
>Regards, Kaare
>
>
>--  
>uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!2!231!15!Kaare.Rasmussen
>Internet: Kaare.Rasmussen@f15.n231.z2.fidonet.org

Frank.Warren@f42.n161.z1.fidonet.org (Frank Warren) (05/31/91)

    Actually, Ben, even ACTOR and SMALLTALK require the SDK for any kind of 
custom operations.  I was at the JPI rollout of the product at Software 
Development '91, and indeed, JPI did have Windows stuff running, and were 
able to fork off the JPI environment from Windows itself.  I have not tried 
this, as I'm hip deep in other things and haven't had a chance to play, but 
the JPI tech support crew knows how this is done.  They did have a demo 
running quite adequately under Windows 3.0 at that time (Feb '91).
    The MS Windows SDK will almost always be required for commercial 
products; it's the only way you can get ikons and custom install stuff at the 
present time.  JPI has said that they are working on providing full Windows 
resources which will entirely replace the SDK (there are almost 1200 Windows 
aps already; hot market and JPI seem to be serious about staying with it).
    More important is that the OOP stuff is coming along well, and nothing 
has been "de-enhanced" along the way.  The OOP feature makes some folks 
bristle, but there's no question that while it is a frill, it's a nice one 
and can be very useful once one gets the point of it all.

--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!161!42!Frank.Warren
Internet: Frank.Warren@f42.n161.z1.fidonet.org