Re: Fw: C-Bus Pascal Automation Controller (PAC) -MinReview

["christopher purves" <CHRIS_PURVES@xxxxxxx>]

Wasn't having a go!

I do agree though they make some odd choices:

They write c-gate 2.0 in java - well done - it runs on pretty much anything

They write toolkit in a language I forget but have never heard of before -
bad - only runs on windows. Stupid really.

Same with PICED.

The PAC, although it has a USB port, has a fu**** irritating USB to serial
driver with it so PICED actually connects to a serial port that is mapped
by
drives to a USB port - mad and flakey as hell.

So yes someone there is smoking crack or is bored and likes trying out new
things.

Chris




>From: Ian Lowe <ianlowe@xxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Fw: [ukha_d] C-Bus Pascal Automation Controller (PAC)
>-MinReview
>Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:35:56 +0000
>
>On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 12:00 +0000, christopher purves wrote:
> > I like mine :)
> >
> > PASCAL is also rather easy to read and write. Its a fairly clear
>language
> > for people who are not programmers. Don't get me wrong - compared
to
>modern
> > languages PASCAL is the poor relative, but, like BASIC, you can
learn to
> > write it in no time.
> >
> > Chris
>
>actually, I should point out that I don't have anything against Pascal,
>as such - it was the first programming language I learned. it's more
>that the number of real time C environments in the field means (I
think,
>at any rate) that it would be much easier to produce a "known
good"
>environment.
>
>to build an embedded pascal... there are some resources online, but
they
>must have built the thing pretty much from scratch in house.
>
>anyhoo, not looking to make a big thing of it ;)
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>