info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Use of BBC BASIC for speed-critical applications
30 views
Skip to first unread message
Peter Naulls
Jan 11, 2010, 12:28:26 PM1/11/10
to
Richard Russell wrote:
> On Jan 11, 4:38 pm, Peter Naulls <pe...@chocky.org> wrote:
>> Perhaps they might in future, but for the moment, your monthly
>> advocacy about BASIC on Windows and x86 is the same old stuff,
>
> Absolutely classic that you should think I'm advocating BB4W or x86,
> when the point I've been making in this thread is completely platform
> neutral (at least, excluding Brandy which doesn't have an assembler).
> On Jan 11, 4:38 pm, Peter Naulls <pe...@chocky.org> wrote:
>> Perhaps they might in future, but for the moment, your monthly
>> advocacy about BASIC on Windows and x86 is the same old stuff,
>
> Absolutely classic that you should think I'm advocating BB4W or x86,
> when the point I've been making in this thread is completely platform
> neutral (at least, excluding Brandy which doesn't have an assembler).
(notice how much of my post you snipped)
The fallacy of your post is so obvious I won't even point it out, but
please don't continue to make excuses to clutter up this group with your
endless posts which have no value to people trying to solve genuine
RISC OS problems. Follow ups set, for whatever value that has.
Richard Russell
Jan 11, 2010, 12:51:46 PM1/11/10
to
On Jan 11, 5:28 pm, Peter Naulls <pe...@chocky.org> wrote:
> The fallacy of your post is so obvious I won't even point it out
> The fallacy of your post is so obvious I won't even point it out
A fitting epitaph to this thread.
Richard.
Rob Kendrick
Jan 11, 2010, 12:56:10 PM1/11/10
to
It's interesting how so many people can identify the fallacy in your
posts, but you're unable to.
B.
0 new messages