malpass@LL-VLSI.ARPA (Don Malpass) (07/02/88)
Ken, You made my day with the Brazil-nut crack and your parting words - thanks. As for sources, I am a C-hacker and don't even have a pascal compiler. So my choice would be to start with C-code and beat on that, rather than convert the furnished .pas sources. I seem to remember reading something about a TP-to-TC conversion program "out there", but that introduces yet another variable into a process that invariably never reaches completion due to lack of time, so that's a last resort. In one of the .doc files you mentioned that you were working on a .c version for some other machine, so I thought I'd take your pulse about it's status and availability. Given the choice, I'd rather beat on that, rather than try to convert the furnished .pas sources. Thanks again for the response. don [malpass@LL-vlsi.arpa]
jrv%sdimax2@MITRE-BEDFORD.ARPA (07/02/88)
> I seem to remember > reading something about a TP-to-TC conversion program "out there", but > that introduces yet another variable into a process that invariably > never reaches completion due to lack of time, so that's a last resort. > don [malpass@LL-vlsi.arpa] Microsoft is distributing a Turbo-Pascal to C conversion program, presumably to encourage people to use MSC and Quick C. I have it, but I'm not too happy with it. It does "too good" a job. Almost all function calls get converted to calls to special library routines like T2CM_READ(...) which they supply. There is a lot of manual work left if you want readable, not just executable, code. I would have been happier if they would have automated the syntax conversion only, and flagged the I/O routines for manual conversion. - Jim Van Zandt