From: mur@awite.de   
      
   > Do you mean here FCL compilers or FCL "virtual machines" running on some   
   > target hardware. Clearly, other compilers will not be conform. For a   
   > virtual machine it should be no matter because a static expressions will be   
   > resolved to a constant. It is a question what target the back end aim.   
   >   
      
   I think about ordinary PC programs. In my case, I want to use a program,   
   where I can test, debug and visualize my fuzzy rules. There are some   
   which are programmed in Java.   
      
      
   > If the target need to be a fuzzy controller, then FCL in its present state   
   > seems ill-suited for this. It completely lacks hardware description.   
      
   In my case, I integrate it into a larger control system. I want use FCL   
   in order to be able to optimize my rules with external programs.   
      
   Other control software would make it similar. I think, that is the   
   reason why a FUNCTION_BLOCK was introduced into FCL, or not?   
      
   In the case of a PLC it make much sense to use FCL: You can develop and   
   test your fuzzy rules and set with external progams. As soon as the   
   rules are ready to use, you can integrate it into the PLC and control a   
   plant...   
      
      
   >   
   > 1. FCL could be extended ...   
   > 2. FCL extended to become a universal-purpose language...   
   > 3. FCL embeddable in a universal-purpose language...   
   > 4. FCL supplied as a library for a universal-purpose language...   
   >   
      
   5. FCL to be used only as a single function block in a control system.   
   I/O of the variables will be handled by that system...   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)