Hi folks,

Catching up a bit here:

Ray Shapp pointed out a few problems, such as the lack of a
version update in "Help... About" and negative magnitudes sorting
badly in "Make Star Table". I've fixed these, and they'll show up
next time I post an update. He also wrote:

"(3). Any chance the info in a table of 'Create star list'
could include sortable columns of common names, Beyer designations,
Flamsteed numbers, etc. (maybe depending on whether the preference
has been set to show common names etc. on the display)?"

I do have some thoughts for more configurable tables, but I
want to tackle this in a very general way that would mean you
could create customized tables of just about any sort of object.
(Sort of the way you can configure ephemerides with the "Ephemeris
Items" dialog, which is what got me thinking of such things.)
I've thought up a good way to do this:

http://www.projectpluto.com/future.htm#data_tables

but haven't had time to implement it yet. (If I were triplets,
I _might_ make a dent in the list of things I wanna do...)

Richard asked: "Is there any way to have a telescope cursor
that shows the telescope position in Guide 8.0?"

(Situation right now) For Tangent Instruments-type encoders,
yes. After aligning the scope, "Slew Guide" causes Guide to
recenter on the point the scope is currently aimed at. "Slew
Telescope" causes Guide to put up a cursor that tracks the scope
position; move the scope far enough, and Guide redraws the
chart to keep up with the motion.

(Situation relatively soon, I hope!) For all scopes, this
can be done.

For hand-moved scopes, another "slewing" option may be
available with the next update: one where you select a target
in Guide, and then Guide tells you how far away the scope is
from said target. Thus, it might give you commands such as
"left ten degrees, up five... left three degrees, up one...
right a quarter degree... you got it."

Incidentally, this may also prove to be an area where use
of sound may be helpful. I'm thinking that it would be nice if
the computer "spoke" the above words, instead of/in addition
to showing them on-screen. That way, you could push the scope
around without having to look back at the computer. (It'd be
quite annoying when observing with others, though!)

Jeff Medkeff wrote:

"...I agree that COM object programming with C++ is a pain,
much worse than it should be based on my rather thin experience.
But it seems far more painful to code a COM server than a COM
client, which I think is all you should need."

Exactly. If I have to write a server, I'll abandon my C/C++
chauvinism and use some other language for the job.

The DLL option _is_ a tempting one. It might open up ASCOM
to some other folk, too (Chris Marriott, any interest?) Right
now, I'm more inclined to at least attempt a "for-real" C/C++
implementation, especially since some people are telling me it's
ugly, but doable. I greatly appreciate the offer, but I'm
hoping I won't have to take you up on it!

-- Bill