> Still need to either hand it a TP string, not a C++ string...

Ah.

 > Which would be most likely to be usefull, adding TP string
 > support to C++, and using it to drive the ASM routines, or
 > converting the ASM routines to handle C++?

No idea - it depends on whetther TP strings are worth supporting for
whatever you're using it for.  But a simple "TP" string
translation to C++ won't quite work - and besides, you'll loose out on the
better optimisations possible in C++, such as length > 255, reference
counting and flexible/efficient use of memory.  Syntactically, they can be
designed to be used pretty much the same as TP strings, but a C++
implementation will usually be the more efficient.

Cheers,

  david

---