Hey all - yes, I made it, and the weather here in San Diego is beautiful :)

> The penalties associated with doing this however are: (i)
> QCTerm's deliverable
> code will be larger (by how much, I don't know), and (ii) QCTerm will no
> longer be able to be run on Windows 3.x machines. We will be
> constrained to
> 95/98/NT devices.

Your code will be about 1.5 to 2.2 times larger --- not much considering
what you are using now, Wirt...  that, and with disks in the GIGAbyte range,
I don't think you have much to worry about.

As for the 95/98/NT/3.x issue - 3.x is obsolete.  Looking at it from HP's
point of view, it hit obsolesence in late 1998 to early 1997.  Being that
this is mid 1998, I can see a case being made to natively compile, get the
speed improvement, and compete.

> Thus the choices are:
>
>      1. Compatible everywhere -- but slower everywhere.

No - but I think you knew that I thought that, even before you asked this
question :)

>      2. Run only on 95/98/NT -- but substantially faster.

Yes - very much so -- this is the choice that one should take, IMHO...

And now, back to polishing off "ODBC Gotchas" for tomorrow.  Those in San
Diego, who want to find out how to get around those Gotchas - 4:30
Wednesday, in HP's Interactive Classroom.

Joe