gnupic: Re: [gnupic] PIC assembler technique question
Subject:
Re: [gnupic] PIC assembler technique question
From:
Craig Franklin ####@####.####
Date:
19 May 2005 06:11:14 +0100
Message-Id: <428C2042.4090000@users.sourceforge.net>
Bill Freeman wrote:
<snip>
>Final questions:
>
> Is this totally bogus and or useless in some way that I'm
>missing?
>
Not bogus. The subject has come up before.
>If it's interesting, do you have opinions on syntax?
>If I were to develop a set of patches for gpasm, would it likely
>be accepted (eventually),
>
I would have to know more about the implementation details and how
extensive the changes are before saying yes.
>or does the desire to stay faithful to
>mpasm mean that we would be forked forever?
>
>
>
No. gpasm already has many features that mpasm doesn't. So far none of
these features has created any requirements conflicts. If they ever do
it is easy enough to add a new switch as others have suggested.
> TIA, Bill
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
>For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
>
>
>
>
