Does SBDVP work with CT and NA?

Several people have asked me if SBDVP, which uses the DVP interface of TRlog to make a sound card voice keyer, will also work with CT and NA. I haven't tried it, and no one has reported it working, so the short answer is no. There are several issues:

I believe that CT and NA use extended memory to store the log. If they happen to grab all available extended memory, SBDVP would need to be changed to allocate a fixed amount of extended memory when it is first started. The current algorithm allocates memory only when a recording is started or when an audio file is read in.
I believe CT and NA can be set up to send call signs and exchanges that change, e.g. serial numbers, without a human saying anything into the microphone by using the dvp to send separate letter/number audio files as well as other canned messages. Because of the way I set up the extended memory for SBDVP, there is a limit of around 100 audio files that can be sent using SBDVP. This could be fixed, but TR can't use this many anyway, so I didn't put in better memory management. If you want to save some CQs and fixed exchanges, etc. the current method should work fine in CT or NA too.
I don't have documentation for the K1EA DVP, so I wrote a little code that intercepted the commands that TR sends to the DVP when I push various keys. After looking at this output I was able to reverse engineer enough of the interface to the DVP to make TR use SBDVP as a simple voice keyer. It is likely that CT and NA will make somewhat different calls to the DVP and therefore SBDVP won't work with them. Since I give away the C source code to SBDVP, It is probably an evening's work to make SBDVP work, as a simple voice keyer, with CT and NA for anyone who:
- Is a competent C programmer.
- Has a copy of the Borland Turbo-C compiler that SBDVP was written in (or any other DOS C compiler if you translate the Borland library calls, etc.).
- Has a copy of CT or NA -- in addition a copy of any programming documentation for the K1EA DVP would be a big help.
- Is able to figure out what I did in my code -- various ugly coding is used since I don't understand DOS. For example I store lots of stuff in static global variables, because I don't know how local variables are allocated for interrupt routines. I normally write scientific codes mostly on unix systems. I hate working with Microsoft operating systems, particularly the toy ones i.e. DOS and Windows 95/98, so I keep my use of them to a minimum. I may be doing something stupid because of my lack of DOS knowledge.
It is possible that there are other problems with using SBDVP with CT and NA that I am unaware of since I don't have or use those loggers.