On 11/16/06, Peter P. wrote: > William Couture gmail.com> writes: > > > I wouldn't pay for that level of "translation" -- it would be worse > > than useless. > > Why ? The point is to turn the assembly into compilable C. Of course there can > be a lot of tuning done but the point is that the 'useless' output will actually > compile on any C compiler (with some care). So maybe your example (DOS specific > IO and program termination) was not so good. "Why" is that no new information is being added. In fact, you are just obscuring the code. If you look at the example converted code on the website, it's a "normal" C function. And, since Assembly is intimately tied to the hardware and OS, my example was quite typical. Bill -- Psst... Hey, you... Buddy... Want a kitten? straycatblues.petfinder.org -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist