info@pro-carolina.UUCP.UUCP (10/30/87)
Just a few comments about the Merlin vs APW/ORCA stuff. I don't have any interest in APW/ORCA other than as a user though I have written a shareware P16 based OS shell that is partially compatible with APW/ORCA (called Extended Command Processor 16) EXE files (shell load files produced by the assembler or any of the high level language compilers available now). One of the ideas behind APW/ORCA (basically the same product incidentally though the latter is cheaper and usually available in a later revision) was that all languages would share the same REL file format and protocol such that a common linker could be used to create final load files that could combine any of the languages available from any vendor much in the same way you can frequently do in mainframe and mini-computer environments. I like this idea and while it sometimes requires that you give up one or another feature in the interest of compatibility I think the advantages frequently outweigh the disadvantages. Personally I would not purchase any compiler that didn't product APW/ORCA compatible object code but to each his own on this point. Right now, the only P16 shells I know of are my own (ECP16) and APW and ORCA. You have to buy a full development system for APW and ORCA but you can buy ECP16 for $40 if all you want is the shell. I wrote ECP16 so people who aren't necessarily programmers could use command line oriented programs under P16 without having to buy full development packages. Most EXE files that run under APW/ORCA will run under ECP16. Hope I didn't offend anyone with my use of the word DABBLERS.. We're all dabblers at one level or another. I just think that I would become frustrated with the turn-around required to develop a P16 program from a P8 environment without access to use of high level languages where the application suits their use. Agree with you about beta testing.. Given the choice of a finished product next year or a beta product last year I think I'd still go with the latter if it didn't cost me too much. I think you get a much better deal sticking with the ORCA product (from ByteWorks) over going with APW from APDA. For one thing, service from APDA is pretty sorry, APW costs more, and ORCA is usually at a later revision than APW is anyway and ORCA updates are faster and cheaper. There is an 8-bit version of ORCA (and a DOS version I think but then who cares?) You can write P8 programs using ORCA/GS though ORCA/GS doesn't include P8 macro libraries though other assemblers don't include much of anything in the way of macro or subroutine libraries anyway so a merlin user probably wouldn't miss them. I'm a ProDOS bigot and DOS 3.3 compatibility would count as a minus with me just as a matter of principal but like I said.. I'm a ProDOS bigot. The 8-bit version of ORCA had a decent disassembler. Theres a very crude one for the 16-bit version (DUMPOBJ - very crude). I hope they'll release a 16-bit version that's at least as nice as the 8-bit one was but no word on this yet. Don Elton 3207 Berkeley Forest Drive Columbia, SC 29209 BBS 300-2400 baud 803-776-3936 UUCP: [ ihnp4 sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!pnet01!pro-sol!pro-carolina!delton ARPA: crash!pnet01!pro-sol!pro-carolina!delton@nosc.mil INET: delton@pro-sol.cts.com