home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Columbia Kermit
/
kermit.zip
/
archives
/
harris800.tar.gz
/
harris800.tar
/
h800ker.bwr
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1988-08-16
|
3KB
|
54 lines
11-Nov-86 20:46:43-EST,2766;000000000001
Return-Path: <C04689SR%WUVMD.BITNET@CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Received: from CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU by CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU with TCP; Tue 11 Nov 86 20:46:41-EST
Received: from WUVMD(MAILER) by CUVMA (Mailer X1.23b) id 5737;
Tue, 11 Nov 86 20:05:12 EST
Received: by WUVMD (Mailer X1.23b) id 1047; Tue, 11 Nov 86 19:02:04 CST
Date: 11 November 1986 19:00:28 CST
From: Skip Russell <C04689SR@WUVMD.BITNET>
Subject: comparison of Pascal and Harris Kermits
To: Frank da Cruz <sy.fdc@cu20b.columbia.edu>
You asked if I thought my Fortran version of Kermit should replace
the Pascal one. Although I think my Kermit is generally a big
improvement over the Pascal version, I don't think mine should replace
it for two reasons:
The first is that mine runs *only* as a remote server. There is
no facility for driving a remote Kermit, either from within the program
or through command-line arguments. So, for example, Harris-Harris xfers
are not possible without using some intermediate like a PC. It is
intended primarily for Harris--micro communications, where the micro has
the "local" Kermit. Command line "send" and "receive" would be easy to
add, but so far for us, the need hasn't arisen.
Secondly, all the newer Harris machines have i/o processors which are
capable of doing buffered single-character i/o. They are also capable
of timing-out while waiting for input. These two capabilities are not
present on many of the older Harris machines (including ours). The
Pascal Kermit requires this hardware and my Kermit does not. On
systems with the hardware, there is a potential advantage to using
the Pascal Kermit, but I don't know what it really means in terms of
effective baud rate, etc. I recently gave a copy of my program to
Joe Doupnik who has access to a Harris machine. He has the Pascal
Kermit, so maybe he will be able to compare the two.
You also asked whether the Fortran compiler was standard on all
Harris machines. Actually, both Harris Fortran 77 and Harris Pascal
are optional products, so no system is guaranteed to have either one.
However, I think the Fortran is considerably more widespread at
Harris sites than Pascal, judging by the programs available in the
Harris Users Exchange library.
Incidently, the reason I am waiting to submit my Kermit is that
"MSTIBM" (prelim 2.29a) has a glitch in the packet-size logic which
is causing some problems. I have discussed it with Joe D., and I'm
sure the two Kermits will be in concordance when the formal release
of 2.29a comes about.
I hope this answers your questions. I'll keep you posted on
future developments. -- Skip
Skip Russell (Washington University, St. Louis) BITNET: c04689sr@WUVMD