Re: I think TempC Simple *is* worth it!

[magnusfalkirk <dean.phares@gmail.com>]

On Nov 26, 5:33 pm, Harry Potter <maspethro...@aol.com> wrote:
> I know that I'm being annoiying by bugging all of you about TempC, but
> I still believe in TempC.   TempC Simple is a watered-down version of
> TempC for DOS and can create C modules for you.  I think it's faster
> to use TempC Simple DOS than typing all your program's #includes and
> basic structure yourself.  TempC Simple is in its alpha stages and has
> limited functionality but shows its intended functionality.  Just make
> sure you select the cc65 compiler--the others are unwritten.  If you
> want to try it out, e-mail me for a copy.  My e-mail address is
> maspethro...@aol.com.  If you e-mail me, please start the subject with
> "To Joseph:" as I share my e-mail address.
> -------------------
> Joseph Rose, a.k.a. Harry Potter
> Working magic in the computer community...or at least striving to! :(

It's amazing how often you keep bringing this program up, even though
you yourself have said, back in May in comp.sys.cbm, that two people
had tried it and said it was a bad idea. With all the negative
feedback you've gotten both there and here since you first mentioned
this program I would think that by now you'd understand that nobody is
interested in it.

In fact someone in comp.sys.cbm made the suggestion that you should
just create the program for yourself and make it work the way you want
it to. If you can do that, and are happy with it yourself, then you've
accomplished what you wanted.

Dean