Re: A89: Re: Re: "C"

To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A89: Re: Re: "C"
From: Cassady Roop <croop@oregontrail.net>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 17:30:44 -0700
References: <20000517231638.15177.qmail@web1403.mail.yahoo.com> <004801bfc057$6dfc4400$f4ec5c18@twcny.rr.com> <007401bfc147$f735cc00$234afacf@cybrzn.com>
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org


That's no good for the assembly lists, at least not the z80 ones,
because the 86,85, and 83 (I don't know about 82) are all so different
from each other that members of the list would be totally confused. 
Just because they use the same processor doesn't necessarily make them
similar enough to group together.

Cassady Roop

> I like this idea, but perhaps we could even take it a few steps further,
> changing the entire ticalc list setup:
> 
> C-programming  -- for all C related messages on any C capable calc
> asm-68k -- for all 68k assembly related messages on any 68k based calc
> asm-z80 -- for all z80 assembly related messages on any z80 based calc
> system-85
> system-86
> system-89

References:

A89: "C"

From: Jimmy Baker <ashbar83@yahoo.com>

A89: Re: "C"

From: "Sebastian Reichelt" <SebastianR@gmx.de>

A89: Re: Re: "C"

From: "Kaus" <kaus@cybrzn.com>

Prev: Re: A89: Re: Re: "C"
Next: A89: File API
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread