CompuServe Messages

#CoComm 2.22

    09-Jan-88 08:04:23
Sb: #CoComm 2.22
Fm: Ben Blish 72667,1341
To: SYSOP (X)
Once more through the breach, dear freinds… Well, I didn't _mean_ to do it, but… here's one more upload of CoComm. Why? Well, besides the obligatory new features, CoComm 2.21 had what was probably the worst bug of any CoComm version yet posted; 2.21 would GURU at the slightest provocation doing any one of a number of things due to a window pointer that was not initialized… sometimes. This has been fixed, and the program is again stable. In addition to the bug fix, which was the real reason for this upload, there are some new things here and there in the program. Most interesting is the addition of subroutine calls, conditional subroutine calls, implicit returns, and conditional returns to the macro key command set. These new capabilities are documented in the file "shortdox" that is in the 2.22 archive. Also, while working with people using CoComm 2.21 in conference, I realized that the way the review buffer was set up was not as convenient as it had first appeared to me; accordingly, I added a STOP and START menu selection so that the review buffer could be toggled selectively while remaining open. Previously, the only way to stop it was to close it and lose all the data therein. Not very smart. <blush>. With each posting, the Error handling within CoComm is enhanced; This is especially important as CoComm is not a passive terminal program – all the special active modes make for a lot of potential problem areas, especially when you add in line noise and other unpredictable comm elements. I'm reasonably happy with CoComm at this point – as a matter of fact, if it were not for the bug in the window pointer, I probably wouldn't have been posting at all today. Maybe even till monday. But…… oh well. I posted CoComm 2.22 to Dl5, as DL4 informed me that it had exceeded it's quota… again. (Is this my fault?) Hehehe. So… especially since 2.21 is really not a good deal… Please merge 2.22 into DL4 as CoComm.arc, deleting the previous version? Thanks! –Ben–