Marcel Kligus wrote:
jms1 wrote:
As Dilwyn Jones says in his article in Qtoady that TurboPtr is more
flexible than EasyPtr,
Well, but mostly in the sense that Assembler is more flexible than
Basic. Still most people prefer to program in Basic. EasyPtr is not
simply a wrapper around the
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], jms1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
SNIP
The main benefit of the free software movement is that source is distributed
normally with the code and anybody is free to develope it, and within the
license conditions distribute it.
This may be an area where some programmers may
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 06:24:18 -0400, Dilwyn Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
snip
I fear my knowledge of Turbo compiler is too rusty after years of not
using it, and my knowledge of TurboPTR very minimal, so I'd appreciate
some articles from someone (probably along the lines of the ones I
jms1 wrote:
As Dilwyn Jones says in his article in Qtoady that TurboPtr is more
flexible than EasyPtr,
Well, but mostly in the sense that Assembler is more flexible than
Basic. Still most people prefer to program in Basic. EasyPtr is not
simply a wrapper around the PE, it actively relieves the
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], P Witte
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
John Sadler writes:
As Dilwyn Jones says in his article in Qtoady that TurboPtr is more
flexible
than EasyPtr, and the group members feel that software should be paid for,
George I wondered whether the group members did not use it
- Original Message -
From: jms1
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 10:30 PM
Subject: [ql-users] Software Prices.
As Dilwyn Jones says in his article in Qtoady that TurboPtr is more
flexible
than EasyPtr, and the group members feel that software should be paid for,
George
As Dilwyn Jones says in his article in Qtoady that TurboPtr is more flexible
than EasyPtr, and the group members feel that software should be paid for,
George I wondered whether the group members did not use it because it was
free and they would be happier paying £60 to George because then they
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], jms1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
As Dilwyn Jones says in his article in Qtoady that TurboPtr is more flexible
than EasyPtr, and the group members feel that software should be paid for,
George I wondered whether the group members did not use it because it was
free and
John Sadler writes:
As Dilwyn Jones says in his article in Qtoady that TurboPtr is more
flexible
than EasyPtr, and the group members feel that software should be paid for,
George I wondered whether the group members did not use it because it
was
free and they would be happier paying £60 to
