> Re. Lou Sortman's misgivings about David Tait's programmer: I constructed this
> about a week ago and I've been using it constantly since then. I'm pleased to
> report that it functions wonderfully, but of course it does tie up the paralle
l
> port. I'm working on an alternative to this, which may or may not become a
> reality, and won't tie up the port. In the meantime I would only say that for
a
> few quid (dollars, marks, or whatever) you can't POSSIBLY go wrong with it (an
d

Sorry if I came off as criticizing Mr. Tait's programmer.  I have no doubt that
it is a good design.  I wouldn't even consider building it, otherwise.

The parallel port is the best way if you are going for cheap and easy
(two of the plusses of his programmer).  If you happen to have two or three
such ports on your computer, it doesn't obviate printing.  Of course, the vast
majority of projects which people design for PCs need the parallel interface
too.  I've seen some schemes which offer some sort of port multiplying, but
they have never caught on.  Oh well, this is getting sort of far off charter
for this list, so I'll shut up now...

> by the way, real programmers never need to print their source code!).

I guess I'm not a real programmer, then.  ;-)

> Thanks for your great effort, David.

Yes.  Thanks.