Hi Vasi, > Well, I referred JAT as a Pascal to C translator... which is possible > if you have the same functions/procedures on the other side... but > having problems at data types for "bigger" targets Well... the data type size can probably be fixed. But what is the major advantage to program in JAL in stead of Pascal or C?
> One major flaw which Jallib have is the way you are working with > libraries and constants... you can't find the same on C and Pascal > language and you will have problems in porting JAL programs to those > targets... > Some how, we are sending parameters to libraries in many cases (we are > messing with global constants/variables) and this is not possible in > Pascal and C.... parameters are only for functions/procedures. Don't confuse JAL libraries with C libraries. JAL libraries are common source files, while C libraries are pre-compiled. If you use sourcefiles like jal-libraries in C too. >So, the major conclusion is that the Jallib libraries are not portable > because the way they are designed/used. > It require a redesign of Jallib, using the standard rules of C and > Pascal. This is true, but I don't see why this is an issue. Joep -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
