Re: LZ: Usgard

To: list-zshell@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: LZ: Usgard
From: Tony Lieuallen <arantius@erols.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 15:57:33 -0400
Organization: completely unorganized!
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.970611165006.7212B-100000@gold.tc.umn.edu> <19970611.223931.12582.11.Jim.Reardon@juno.com>
Reply-To: list-zshell@lists.ticalc.org

Jim Reardon wrote:
> Exactly.  Then they will be worth it, and I know that they didn't add
> size.  I just ment to say CShell calls aren't really worth it since
> many
> people still use ZShell and the calls have no use for my programs.
> CShell is a great shell, keep up the work.  Maybe you could include
> library support?

I think that the addition of relocation and library support would make
CShell an even more serious comptetitor to USGARD.  Really, I only use
usgard because I have an expander so the memory situation isn't really
all that serious.  Automatic expander support will be the feature that
WILL decide which shell I use, and it looks like USGARD will be it. 
CShell authors, I'd love to see you add those three features though,
becuase you are ovbiously some that understand that size is of the
utmost importance on a 28k calculator!  Great work, EVERYBODY!

-- 
            ''~``
           ( o o )
  ____.oooO__(_)__Oooo.__________
 /  Tony Lieuallen               \
[ arantius@erols.com              ]
[    .oooO http://gifs.home.ml.org]
[    (   )   Oooo.                ]
 \____\ (____(   )_______________/
       \_)    ) /
             (_/

References:

Re: LZ: Usgard

From: Michael Wyman <wyma0012@tc.umn.edu>

Re: LZ: Usgard

From: jim.reardon@juno.com (Jim Reardon)

Prev: Re: LZ: Usgard
Next: Re: LZ: Usgard
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread