Is there any hard or software lock of PIC BASIC PRO COMPILER?

Dr. Imre Bartfai wrote:

> On Fri, 29 May 1998, Dennis Plunkett wrote:
>
> > At 01:33 PM 29/05/98 +0800, you wrote:
> > >Hi all
> > >Does anyone have experience with the PbasicPRO compiler?
> > >Is it worth getting, and does it support all the functions of the
> > >PIC?
> > >Thanks
> > >
> > >Justin Grimm    reaper@southwest.com.au
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Hello Justin ,from a fellow Aussie
> > My question is why basic? The PIC assembler is quite easy, and on top of
> > that one could argue that C is an industry standard.
> >
> > Dennis
> >
> >
> Hello,
>
> why NOT Basic?
>
> Arguments vs. assembler (I like assembler!):
>
> - arithmetic very easy
> - variable maintenance automatic
> - lot of useful stuff you must otherwise program
>   SERIN, SEROUT, SHIFTOUT, I2READ, I2WRITE, LCDOUT, etc.
> - structured programming
> - you can use assembler as integral part of the language wherever you want
>
> I personally has studied the assembly code generated by the PICBasicPRO:
> it is very tight so one does need to be afraid from overhead.
>
> Disadvantages (maybe vs C):
>
> - no dummy parameter for the procedures
> - no local variables (i.e. all are global)
>
> I'm satisfied with PICBasicPRO (after collecting some experience).
>
> Imre