Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!rex!ames!ncar!tank!cps3xx!usenet
From: usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Lattice bugs still?
Message-ID: <5824@cps3xx.UUCP>
Date: 18 Dec 89 01:28:04 GMT
References: <10415@etana.tut.fi> <9532@microsoft.UUCP> <411@enuxha.eas.asu.edu>
Reply-To: porkka@frith.UUCP (Joe Porkka)
Organization: Michigan State University
Lines: 17

In article <411@enuxha.eas.asu.edu> martin@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (Ross D. Martin) writes:
>In article <9532@microsoft.UUCP>, w-edwinh@microsoft.UUCP (Edwin Hoogerbeets) writes:
>> unrecognized pragma is ignored.
>> 
>> Why __chip? We've got the PORTABLE mechanism already. Why not use it?
>> Was there some good technical reason? (__chip must go. This is not 
>> negotiable. ;-)

How many Amiga programs that would need to use __chip
use non-amiga specific stuff???


I would suggest that any program that needs __chip is not readily
portable to begin with.

Things would be different if AmigaOS ran on multiple architectures.
 Joe Porkka   porkka@frith.egr.msu.edu