I don't even think we need to concentrate on "many targets". One high- power target family would be sufficient, and one C compiler. I don't see the point in supporting more low power target chips.
So, if Kyle is not willing to add 32bit support to JalV2 over time, then we could continue with JAT. If we where to choose one C compiler I think JAT could act exactally like JALv2. Leave the decision up to Kyle, since he did not agree with JAT. >But what is the major advantage to program in JAL in stead of Pascal or C? The syntax, and jallib are the major advantages. Having a project stop because of a decision that can't be resolved seems silly to me. Please try to resolve this so we can move forward. Matt. -- 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.
