Kari, > As for making new versions on current software platforms, I would > not base them on assembly code. [...] However, good modern editors > abound (and open-source codebases for such programs are available > for that matter), I agree that the way forward, long-term, would be to port the assembly code to a modern, memory-safe language that could then be maintained as open source. That would lay the foundation for a next-generation word-processor with modern features such as Unicode support, the ability to toggle among the various text encodings (something that EditPad does superbly), multilevel undo, and so forth. But it would also allow for backward compatibility with XyWrite's key legacy features -- its system of markup, the ability to toggle between "expanded" (markup) and formatted views, and four decades' worth of XPL-based customizations -- something that no existing modern editor can offer. A castle in Spain? Perhaps, but as Harry says: > The answer to our prayers might be AI. We're not there yet, certainly, but who knows? AI is advancing fast, and it may not be long before it's capable of taking a blueprint written in assembly code and turning out something recognizable as XyWrite but with modern conveniences. -- Carl Distefano cld@xxxxxxxxxx