Hi all -

One language I've never used is Pascal, and I've heard it has been a popular language for people wanting to write BBS software and BBS doors. Borland went on to enhance the Pascal language, creating Delphi, and I've heard that Delphi is still evolving.. I'm curious what sets Pascal/Delphi apart from languages like C++, C, etc. that makes it a popular language for some things? Also, is it possible to make use of an existing C/C++ codebase or DLL from Pascal/Delphi?
Nightfox

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Nightfox to All on Thu Apr 14 2011 01:07 pm

One language I've never used is Pascal, and I've heard it has been a
popular language for people wanting to write BBS software and BBS doors. Borland went on to enhance the Pascal language, creating Delphi, and I've heard that Delphi is still evolving.. I'm curious what sets Pascal/Delphi apart from languages like C++, C, etc. that makes it a popular language for some things? Also, is it possible to make use of an existing C/C++
codebase or DLL from Pascal/Delphi?
Nightfox

Pitty you didn't learn it. It's a much more ellegant language. It's not
case sensitive like C. As far as Turbo Pascal (most popular) and Delphi,
it's later versions are object oriented. If you can get used to Turbo
Vision, it's owl is almost identical, just change the units... Eg. to
create a window for DOS in turbo vision, you use:

mywind := new(init(r,'Hello World');
Desktop^.insert(mywind);


For windows, you do the exact same thing I believe.... Just using the windows units, which would be OWL (Object Windows Library).

As far as reading C DLL files, you use:

Function C_Function(x,y : integer); external 'c_dll' name 'c_function';

To declare a function c_function from the c_dll.dll DLL file. For .obj files, you use:

function C_Function(x,y : integer); extern; {$L c_obj.obj}

You have built-in assembler in 6.0 and up, as either:

PROCEDURE puts(s : string); assembler;
asm
lds dx, s
mov ah, 9
int $21
end;

Or as

PROCEDURE ChangeMode(x : Byte);
BEGIN
ASM
MOV AL, X
SUB AH, AH
INT $10
END;
END;

For mixing Assembly and Pascal in the same function. For Objects:

TYPE Animal = Object
public:
Name : String;
constructor Init;
destructor deinit;
procedure talk;
private:
talkStr : string;
END;

constructor Animal.Init;
BEGIN
Self.TalkStr := 'Bark Bark';
END;

Destructor Animal.Deinit;
BEGIN
Self.TalkStr := '';
END;

PROCEDURE Animal.Talk;
BEGIN
WriteLn(TalkStr);
END;

VAR A : Animal;

BEGIN
A.Init;
A.Talk;
A.Deinit;
END.


---
■ Synchronet ■ Roach Guts - roachguts.com

--- NIGHTFOX wrote --
Hi all

One language I've never used is Pascal, and I've heard it has been a popul language for people wanting to write BBS software and BBS doors. Borland
on to enhance the Pascal language, creating Delphi, and I've heard that De
is still evolving.. I'm curious what sets Pascal/Delphi apart from langua like C++, C, etc. that makes it a popular language for some things? Also,
it possible to make use of an existing C/C++ codebase or DLL fro Pascal/Delphi?

The old version of my BBS was in Turbo Pascal.

I think there are several reasons for the populatity of Pascal back in the day.

Turbo Pascal was available for CP/M, so it was out before the IBM PC came
out. It was cheap. Lots of poeple got taught Pascal in college. Pascal isn't C. Programming in C is like being a masocist on a diet.

I was going to port QBBS to delphi, but my friend (who wrote one of the competing BBS programs in Phoenix but used to help us all the time) talked
me into learning Ruby instead. I'm glad he did.



---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: the doctor to NIGHTFOX on Thu Apr 14 2011 10:36 pm

--- NIGHTFOX wrote --
Hi all

One language I've never used is Pascal, and I've heard it has been a popul language for people wanting to write BBS software and BBS doors. Borland on to enhance the Pascal language, creating Delphi, and I've heard that De is still evolving.. I'm curious what sets Pascal/Delphi apart from langua like C++, C, etc. that makes it a popular language for some things? Also, it possible to make use of an existing C/C++ codebase or DLL fro Pascal/Delphi?

The old version of my BBS was in Turbo Pascal.

I think there are several reasons for the populatity of Pascal back in the day.

Turbo Pascal was available for CP/M, so it was out before the IBM PC came out. It was cheap. Lots of poeple got taught Pascal in college. Pascal isn't C. Programming in C is like being a masocist on a diet.

I was going to port QBBS to delphi, but my friend (who wrote one of the competing BBS programs in Phoenix but used to help us all the time) talked me into learning Ruby instead. I'm glad he did.

port DLX to a modern pascal.
it was written in Ms Pascal 4

"Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"


---
■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org

--- COREY wrote --

port DLX to a modern pascal
it was written in Ms Pascal

I've never used MS Pascal. I once tried to write a BBS in Apple Pascal.
I don't know how anyone could live in something that small!

I leanred to program on a PDP11 in Oregon Software Pascal II.



---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: the doctor to COREY on Fri Apr 15 2011 12:26 am

--- COREY wrote --

port DLX to a modern pascal
it was written in Ms Pascal

I've never used MS Pascal. I once tried to write a BBS in Apple Pascal.
I don't know how anyone could live in something that small!

I leanred to program on a PDP11 in Oregon Software Pascal II.

I knew a french girl named Pascal once.

"Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"


---
■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: the doctor to NIGHTFOX on Thu Apr 14 2011 22:36:00

Turbo Pascal was available for CP/M, so it was out before the IBM PC came out. It was cheap. Lots of poeple got taught Pascal in college. Pascal isn't C. Programming in C is like being a masocist on a diet.

I can understand that.. But are there any compelling features of Pascal compared to C/C++?

I was going to port QBBS to delphi, but my friend (who wrote one of the competing BBS programs in Phoenix but used to help us all the time) talked me into learning Ruby instead. I'm glad he did.

Ruby is interpreted though, whereas Pascal is compiled to native code, isn't it? I can see advantages and disadvantages to each..

Nightfox

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: John Guillory to Nightfox on Thu Apr 14 2011 15:10:06

Pitty you didn't learn it. It's a much more ellegant language. It's not
case sensitive like C. As far as Turbo Pascal (most popular) and Delphi,

I saw some example Pascal code earlier today, and the syntax seemed strange to me - but I guess that's because I'm not familiar with it.

When I was in college, I don't think there were any Pascal classes.. It sounds like an interesting language though.

Nightfox

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: the doctor to COREY on Fri Apr 15 2011 00:26:00

I leanred to program on a PDP11 in Oregon Software Pascal II.

I'm from Oregon, and I'm not familiar with Oregon Software.. :)

Nightfox

--- COREY wrote --

I knew a french girl named Pascal once

Was she pretty...?



---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

--- NIGHTFOX wrote --

I can understand that.. But are there any compelling features of Pasca compared to C/C++

Well, Pascal is easier to learn, easier to read, doesn't make you manage
your own memory (a large source of bugs in C programs), and is generally easier to deal with.

Ruby is interpreted though, whereas Pascal is compiled to native code, isn it? I can see advantages and disadvantages to each.

Yeah. Being interpreted means you don't have to compile it each time. I remember, back in the day, when I had a PC, you could get up and make a sandwitch and then find out you'd made a typo.

The new version of ruby, 1.9 (which I use) has some sort of bytecode
compiler built in... so it runs many times faster than 1.8


---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

--- NIGHTFOX wrote --

I'm from Oregon, and I'm not familiar with Oregon Software.. :

I don't know if they were actually IN Oregon. (; I think they went bust
about 20 years ago. I've been programming since I was 10, which is about
30 years ago now..



---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: the doctor to NIGHTFOX on Fri Apr 15 2011 10:46:00

Yeah. Being interpreted means you don't have to compile it each time. I remember, back in the day, when I had a PC, you could get up and make a sandwitch and then find out you'd made a typo.

True.. But being interpreted also means that you need to have the interpreter installed in order to run it. Anyone who wants to run your software will need to install Ruby first, if they don't already have it installed.

There are also some cases where some developers/companies don't want their source code exposed for all to see, as is the case with interpreted apps.

They say compiled apps run faster too (since they don't have to be
interpreted each time they run), but these days, that might not be such a big factor..

Nightfox

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: the doctor to NIGHTFOX on Fri Apr 15 2011 10:47:00

I don't know if they were actually IN Oregon. (; I think they went bust about 20 years ago.

Ah, interesting..

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: the doctor to NIGHTFOX on Thu Apr 14 2011 10:36 pm

The old version of my BBS was in Turbo Pascal.

Which BBS would that be? One nice thing about BBS's that give their source
code. Even if they encrypt things to where you can't understand it... They
still allow you to see the structures and how various files are laid out.
If they go doing some weird compression or changing formats in a file,
you can see how they read it and know how to do the same in your program
that needs to manipulate the files.... Providing you have all the libraries
needed. Eg. Some BBS's need Object Pro, etc. I've got portions of Turbo
TechnoJocks Toolkit from various BBS source codes, which I used to have
registered for around the same version that I got.... It was kind of good
to see it again, just don't really have much use for it... ;-)

Turbo Pascal was available for CP/M, so it was out before the IBM PC came out. It was cheap. Lots of poeple got taught Pascal in college. Pascal isn't C. Programming in C is like being a masocist on a diet.

I started off with a pirated copy of Turbo Pascal 3.01, later got Quick Pascal (very unpopular!) and moved onward to Stony Brook Pascal+ (a very high performance version of Turbo Pascal 5.5). Later, bought TMT Pascal+ a DOS/Windows/OS2 32-bit compiler that does I think Turbo Pascal 6 compiling and if you compile a graphical application made to use the GRAPH unit for Windows Console mode (may work on OS/2 as well, have to try it) It'll make a windows GUI application that looks identical to the old DOS version, where you don't need all the .bgi and .chr files... I like it for making a modern version of the old BGIDEMO....

I was going to port QBBS to delphi, but my friend (who wrote one of the competing BBS programs in Phoenix but used to help us all the time) talked me into learning Ruby instead. I'm glad he did.

I used to use delphi a lot... I have Delphi 4, but don't use it much any more... Don't know why, just seems easier and more fun to use TMT or Turbo Pascal... I used to use Virtual Pascal for most things, but when trying to make doors for Renegade, I switched to Turbo.... ;-)



---
■ Synchronet ■ Roach Guts - roachguts.com

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Corey to the doctor on Thu Apr 14 2011 03:17 pm

port DLX to a modern pascal.
it was written in Ms Pascal 4

Where's the source code at? It shouldn't be too difficult unless they use
units that don't have the source code... I faintly remember seeing some
old MS Pascal source code.... It's a standard pascal as compared to
Turbo Pascal. Usually you can compile most code written for a standard
pascal on Turbo without any changes, it's the other way around that is the
problem... I'd also imagine like their Quick Pascal, they use a different
set of graphics routines... But wouldn't expect DLX to have graphics...
If it's in that massive collection of BBS's and has the source code, I'll
take a look at it in the next few days....



---
■ Synchronet ■ Roach Guts - roachguts.com

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: John Guillory to Nightfox on Thu Apr 14 2011 03:10 pm

constructor Init;
destructor deinit;

Why chose Init and deinit instead of the more common Create and Destroy?

FYI, Delphi XE has a $149 starter edition that is pretty good if you want to go that route. I upgraded to XE Pro from Delphi 2007 and it's pretty nice.

FPC is a damn good compiler as well.

g.


---
■ Synchronet ■ The Retro Archive - bbs.retroarchive.org

One nice thing about BBS's that give their source
code. Even if they encrypt things to where you can't understand it... They still allow you to see the structures and how various files are laid out.
If they go doing some weird compression or changing formats in a file,
you can see how they read it and know how to do the same in your program
that needs to manipulate the files....

I think a good alternative to that (if not better) is providing good documentation on the file formats - assuming the developer intends for the
file formats to be open. At least for me, reading documentation in English
can be easier to understand than reading someone else's source code to try to figure out what it's doing. Sometimes a piece of source code can be somewhat convoluted, even when the actual task at hand is fairly simple.

Nightfox

--- NIGHTFOX wrote --

True.. But being interpreted also means that you need to have the interpr installed in order to run it. Anyone who wants to run your software will
to install Ruby first, if they don't already have it installed

I'm pretty sure there is a turnkey thing that will package up everything
you need and install it. Actually, I'm not sure.


That is a good point though. It isn't enough to just install Ruby to run
this software, you have to install loads of other libraries as well. As postgres for that matter.

I'm dredding ever having to write instructions, but I've never gotten the thing to the point where I'd want to release it. (;


---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Gene Buckle to John Guillory on Fri Apr 15 2011 06:41 am

Why chose Init and deinit instead of the more common Create and Destroy? FYI, Delphi XE has a $149 starter edition that is pretty good if you want
to go that route. I upgraded to XE Pro from Delphi 2007 and it's pretty nice.

Just what most DOS OOP programs use. Borland theirselves use init/deinit
or init/run/done in their turbo Vision... I've seen Delphi XE, just hard
to justify it in a way. Especially when I can't say it really ads anything
useful that I can't allready do with Delphi 4....



---
■ Synchronet ■ Roach Guts - roachguts.com

--- JOHN GUILLORY wrote --

The old version of my BBS was in Turbo Pascal

Which BBS would that be?

It's had many names. Quarkware... QBBS... I try not to call it QBBS
because there is another BBS package called that.

I'm sure I paid for a copy of Turbo Pascal 3.01, mainly because you really needed the manual.



---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

On 4/14/2011 11:08 PM, Nightfox wrote:

Ruby is interpreted though, whereas Pascal is compiled to native code, isn't it? I can see advantages and disadvantages to each..

Other than drivers, games or other *really* heavy use instances an interpreted language is more than adequate. You can make changes without a recompile, and load a new version on-the-fly (depending on environment).

Take a look at node.js (V8 + IO) or GLUEscript (spidermonkey + wxWidgets) for server-side JS... really interesting stuff in there. Not to mention MongoDB

--
Michael J. Ryan - http://tracker1.info/

---
■ Synchronet ■ Roughneck BBS - telnet://roughneckbbs.com - www.roughneckbbs.com

On 4/15/2011 3:46 AM, the doctor wrote:

The new version of ruby, 1.9 (which I use) has some sort of bytecode
compiler built in... so it runs many times faster than 1.8

More likely a JIT (Just-In-Time compiler, as opposed to an interpreter)... Though not nearly as familiar with Ruby.

--
Michael J. Ryan - http://tracker1.info/

---
■ Synchronet ■ Roughneck BBS - telnet://roughneckbbs.com - www.roughneckbbs.com

On 4/15/2011 7:56 AM, Nightfox wrote:

They say compiled apps run faster too (since they don't have to be interpreted each time they run), but these days, that might not be such a big factor..

Considering the number of common Linux UI tools written in Python, or .Net apps on windows (bytecode is more optimized than raw script, still JIT though). Would say it really isn't such an issue.

--
Michael J. Ryan - http://tracker1.info/

---
■ Synchronet ■ Roughneck BBS - telnet://roughneckbbs.com - www.roughneckbbs.com

Re: Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Tracker1 to Nightfox on Sun Apr 17 2011 03:02 am

On 4/14/2011 11:08 PM, Nightfox wrote:

Ruby is interpreted though, whereas Pascal is compiled to native code, isn it? I can see advantages and disadvantages to each..

Speaking of Ruby.... is it same thing but for websites... ruby on the
wheel? and ruby is cross platform thing? like unix, windows, etc etc




---
■ Synchronet ■ The Whitehouse BBS - whitehouse.hulds.com - The home of the internetking

Re: Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Internetking to Tracker1 on Sun Apr 17 2011 04:47:00

Speaking of Ruby.... is it same thing but for websites... ruby on the wheel? and ruby is cross platform thing? like unix, windows, etc etc

Are you referring to Ruby On Rails? Or is "Ruby on the Wheel" something different/new? And Ruby is cross-platform.

Nightfox

--- TRACKER1 wrote --

More likely a JIT (Just-In-Time compiler, as opposed to an interpreter)... Though not nearly as familiar with Ruby

I went and looked it up.. according to wikipedia it uses a bytecode interpreter. I'm not entirely sure what that means, but I 'recon it's
some sort of p-code to speed things up.


---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

--- INTERNETKING wrote --
Speaking of Ruby.... is it same thing but for websites... ruby on the
wheel? and ruby is cross platform thing? like unix, windows, etc etc

Ruby on rails? I've never used it. I use something called Sinatra, it is much more lightweight...

You can run Ruby on *nix or windows, but the windows versions lack things really important for BBS programing, like pty. (pseudo terminals).



---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

Re: Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: the doctor to INTERNETKING on Sun Apr 17 2011 22:20:00

You can run Ruby on *nix or windows, but the windows versions lack things really important for BBS programing, like pty. (pseudo terminals).

I wonder why the Windows version would lack features that the *nix version has? I thought one of the ideas behind a scripting language like Ruby was to be multi-platform..

Nightfox

Re: Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Nightfox to Internetking on Sun Apr 17 2011 10:45 am

Speaking of Ruby.... is it same thing but for websites... ruby on the wheel? and ruby is cross platform thing? like unix, windows, etc etc

Are you referring to Ruby On Rails? Or is "Ruby on the Wheel" something different/new? And Ruby is cross-platform.

yes i ment ruby on rails... lol



---
■ Synchronet ■ The Whitehouse BBS - whitehouse.hulds.com - The home of the internetking

Re: Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: the doctor to INTERNETKING on Sun Apr 17 2011 10:20 pm

--- INTERNETKING wrote --
Speaking of Ruby.... is it same thing but for websites... ruby on the wheel? and ruby is cross platform thing? like unix, windows, etc etc

Ruby on rails? I've never used it. I use something called Sinatra, it is much more lightweight...

yes ruby on rail.....

You can run Ruby on *nix or windows, but the windows versions lack things really important for BBS programing, like pty. (pseudo terminals). >

if it was compiled on cygwin , will it still lack those important things?




---
■ Synchronet ■ The Whitehouse BBS - whitehouse.hulds.com - The home of the internetking

--- NIGHTFOX wrote --

I wonder why the Windows version would lack features that the *nix version
I thought one of the ideas behind a scripting language like Ruby was to b multi-platform.

I think it is a case of peusdo terminals not being supported by Windows.
);


That is the only thing, I think, that would prevent the BBS from running
under Windows. I'm sure someone who was clever enough could find a way
around it. I've never bothered to try, because I run it under linux.

I used to run it under Mac OS as well, but installing the stuff you need
on Mac OS is a pain in the butt.



---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

--- INTERNETKING wrote --

if it was compiled on cygwin , will it still lack those important things

Probably not... I imagine cgywin supports pty.



---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

Re: Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Nightfox to Internetking on Sun Apr 17 2011 10:45 am

Re: Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Internetking to Tracker1 on Sun Apr 17 2011 04:47:00

Speaking of Ruby.... is it same thing but for websites... ruby on the wheel? and ruby is cross platform thing? like unix, windows, etc etc

Are you referring to Ruby On Rails? Or is "Ruby on the Wheel" something different/new? And Ruby is cross-platform.

Nightfox

ruby dooby doo?

"Practise safe Lunch, Use a Condiment"


---
■ Synchronet ■ Three Stooges Gentlemens Club - Las Vegas, Nv - tsgc.dyndns.org

On 4/17/2011 3:20 PM, the doctor wrote:

Speaking of Ruby.... is it same thing but for websites... ruby on the
wheel? and ruby is cross platform thing? like unix, windows, etc etc

Ruby on rails? I've never used it. I use something called Sinatra, it is much more lightweight...

You can run Ruby on *nix or windows, but the windows versions lack things really important for BBS programing, like pty. (pseudo terminals).

probably best done in ruby via cygwin then.

--
Michael J. Ryan - http://tracker1.info/

---
■ Synchronet ■ Roughneck BBS - telnet://roughneckbbs.com - www.roughneckbbs.com

Re: Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Nightfox to the doctor on Sun Apr 17 2011 06:39 pm

I wonder why the Windows version would lack features that the *nix version has? I thought one of the ideas behind a scripting language like Ruby was
to be multi-platform..

The concept of Multi-Platform compilers and languages is a bit tricky.
Any language that tries to be exactly the same for every operating system
it targets limits the functionality of the language because of the
differences in operating systems. Linux/Unix is continously developing.
What may work today may be obsolete next year and will require a total
revamp of the language. Terminal features of linux is most likely something
so built-into linux that it's harder for a language to not support it than
to support it. Likewise, there's features in Windows that'd be easier to
support than in Linux. A scripting language may add support for calling
functions from DLL files, while Linux supports Shared Libraries, generally
languages must handle DLL files and Shared Libraries completely different,
rather than using the exact same commands for them. I'm no a big fan of
Ruby, and not familiar with it, but If they have any form of conditional
defines to allow you to code one way for windows and another way for linux,
you may be able to work around some aspects. But as with most scripting
languages, you generally don't have as much power to add in the features.
It's been my observation that scripting languages wasn't designed to be
multi-platform, but a simple language to learn and not have to compile each
time to test it. That's sorta what the Basic scripting languages and
others used as their claim to fame.



---
■ Synchronet ■ Roach Guts - roachguts.com

--- TRACKER1 wrote --

probably best done in ruby via cygwin then

Why not just run it under Linux?


---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

On 4/19/2011 1:51 PM, the doctor wrote:

probably best done in ruby via cygwin then

Why not just run it under Linux?

Depends on your needs, comfort, and familiarity.. I was only offering the suggestion, if you wanted it under windows.

--
Michael J. Ryan - http://tracker1.info/

---
■ Synchronet ■ Roughneck BBS - telnet://roughneckbbs.com - www.roughneckbbs.com

--- TRACKER1 wrote --

Depends on your needs, comfort, and familiarity.. I was only offering the suggestion, if you wanted it under windows

I'll give it a try sometime and let you know the results...



---
■ TARDIS BBS - Home of QUARKseven ■ telnet/http bbs.cortex-media.info

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Nightfox to the doctor on Thu Apr 14 2011 11:08 pm

Ruby is interpreted though, whereas Pascal is compiled to native code, isn't it? I can see advantages and disadvantages to each..

Nightfox

Modern implementations (or at least FPC) appear to compile to native code. Historically it has been interpreted to a run time code (P-code) similar to Java today or certain Basics.


---
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online - bbs.dmine.net - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Chris Perrault to Nightfox on Sun Jan 01 2012 01:47 am

Re: Pascal and Delphi
By: Nightfox to the doctor on Thu Apr 14 2011 11:08 pm

Ruby is interpreted though, whereas Pascal is compiled to native code, is it? I can see advantages and disadvantages to each..

Nightfox

Modern implementations (or at least FPC) appear to compile to native code. Historically it has been interpreted to a run time code (P-code) similar to Java today or certain Basics.

Er' sorry, I didn't check the date and catch how old the message was that I'm replying too. Diamond Mine just updated and apparently reset the Dovenet message pointers.



---
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online - bbs.dmine.net - Fredericksburg, VA USA