Spehro Pefhany wrote:

> >Are you saying that you can't figure out how to make *most* of your
> code device-independent and ANSI compliant with the C30 port of GCC?

Nope.  I can program in assembly language and and very comfortable with 
it, so I do not worry in the least bit about the C30 port of GCC.  That 
is not at all the point.

> >Or are you just whining (BrE: whinging) about the bits that 
> won't/can't be
> like that?

Use of the word "whining" projects an unfair picture, and kind of 
implies that I am unhappy about it all.  I am not unhappy.  I am just 
saying that what we have here is not the C language.  Fine.  I can live 
with that.  But why not come right out and say it???

> Or, perhaps more reasonably, are you objecting on the basis that it 
> allows
> non-standard constructs (eg. case statements, IIRC) for no sufficiently
> good reason?

Actually, I thought it was all quite reasonable. :-)  A bit of a thrust 
toward windmills, true, but still reasonable.

John

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist