Any plans for an updated TCC/LE version

[MartinRichter]

I use TCC/LE privat on my PCs and I am happy that it exists.

Are there any plans for an updated version?

 

[rconn]

We released TCC/LE 14.0 a couple of months ago, which added Windows 10 support and a number of bug / compatibility fixes.

We do not have any plans to add any features to TCC/LE.

 

[MartinRichter]

Thanks. As long as it is compatible to the current OS it is OK.
The Version number 14 was irritating for me, because I thought that it is still only compatible on the level that TCC 14.0 was.

 

[rconn]

There is no connection between the TCMD and TCC/LE version numbers.

 

[Juppycmd]

There is no connection between the TCMD and TCC/LE version numbers.

... at least not anymore, I take it the original TCC/LE was on the average feature level of TCC 13 back then (without the "Take Command" gui)?

Anyway, I had the same question and find the LE version numbering confusing, esp. as afaik there was no TCC/LE 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 or 12. That's probably why other software vendors switched to dates, like "TCC/LE 2015.1" :-)

 

[rconn]

... at least not anymore, I take it the original TCC/LE was on the average feature level of TCC 13 back then (without the "Take Command" gui)?

Nope. The original TCC/LE was (and still is) roughly the equivalent of 4NT v6.

 

[Juppycmd]

The original TCC/LE was (and still is) roughly the equivalent of 4NT v6.

Thanks, I didn't realize - one more reason to add a short piece of information about the LR version numbers and feature level to the download page (https://jpsoft.com/all-downloads/downloads.html) ... it could only help your full TCC sales if people don't think of LE/14 as TCC/14 without the gui.

 

[Rick Reinckens]

LE isn't just "TCC without the GUI". TCC has the IDE and LE doesn't.

The practical reality is that LE will be used on PC's at small companies where the owners would never even consider spending $80 (or even $40) per PC "for a DOS program" even for 3-4 PC's, no matter how useful the product would be. Somebody at the company "dabbles in programming once in awhile at home" and uses TCC and gets stuck doing programming. Because of the management atmosphere he knows to not even bring up the subject of possibly paying for TCC, so he develops with his own copy and writes it to be LE compatible. ("Been there and still doing that ...")

The other situation is where a little utility will help a friend or relative and it wouldn't be worth it for them to pay $80 for TCC just for a simple one-off program.

 

[Juppycmd]

so he develops with his own copy and writes it to be LE compatible. ("Been there and still doing that ...")

Yeah, good luck with that :-p ... tcc and tcc/le are moving further apart with each version, so getting any complex script developed on tcc to work on le will be hell on earth as there's no "le compatibiliy check" in the debugger or the like, but you have to test-run every scenario to see if it works.

 

[Rick Reinckens]

Yeah, good luck with that :-p ... tcc and tcc/le are moving further apart with each version, so getting any complex script developed on tcc to work on le will be hell on earth as there's no "le compatibiliy check" in the debugger or the like, but you have to test-run every scenario to see if it works.

Not difficult at all. Basically, turn off piping and & as the command separator, use GOSUB's instead of user-defined functions, can't use regular expressions and can't use array variables. In my case it's basically reading text from a file, parsing it, massaging the data, and output it in semicolon-delimited files or as text files. We use it to take downloads from hospital information systems and massage those to import into a custom database. We also take output from the database, use TCC/LE to generate a comments file, a csv file that gets imported into Excel, and then start FileZilla to upload the file to this hospital's server.

 

[rconn]

No need to use TCC/LE at all for running scripts; you can use TCC RT which is (1) free, and (2) compatible with the current full version of TCC.

 

[Juppycmd]

No need to use TCC/LE at all for running scripts; you can use TCC RT which is (1) free, and (2) compatible with the current full version of TCC.

It's great you came up with rt, this always was a major point of fud since 4dos times and recently even made me think about switching to python.

 

[smf]

The practical reality is that LE will be used on PC's at small companies where the owners would never even consider spending $80 (or even $40) per PC "for a DOS program" even for 3-4 PC's, no matter how useful the product would be.

I am probably in the minority, but I paid for NDOS, 4DOS & 4NT & multiple upgrades over the years. TCC/LE is most like what I'm used to.

 

[drrob1]

We are in the minority because we are old. I first paid for 4dos v2.21 sometime in the 80s. I'm too old to remember exactly when. I used ndos because I had norton utilities, but ndos was never confirmed to be 4dos. We just all knew it was. :-)
Just kidding about my age. But I ain't no baby, that's for sure.
I use tccle on my VMs. I have tcmd 20 (soon to be v21, when I get a license code emailed to me) on my main win10 box, but I use multiple vmware VMs running XP, vista and win7. I need win10 to talk to hospital computer systems; I primarily use Ubuntu at home. I stick to LTS because it is such a pain to upgrade an entire OS every 6 months.

 

[AnrDaemon]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that TCC RT superceded TCC/LE ?

 

[TEA-Time]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that TCC RT superceded TCC/LE ?

As far as I know, RT doesn't provide an actual command prompt, so I wouldn't consider it a replacement.

 

[AnrDaemon]

TCC/LE doesn't actually provide a usable command prompt either.
Or, more specifically, the only aspect of TCC I'm using is scripting, the "command prompt" is of no interest when you consider things like Far manager.