AT( ) Function. Harbour vs xHarbour

[TimStone]

I'm working with some legacy code orignially developed with xHarbour. The AT() function in xHarbour has this syntax:

At( <cSearch>, <cString>, [<nStart>], [<nEnd>] ) --> nPos

Using Harbour, AT() only supports the first two parameters and will error if the nStart is specified.

Is there an alternative syntax for Harbour that matches the original xHarbour ( and Clipper ) function syntax?

[nageswaragunupudi]

Using Harbour, AT() only supports the first two parameters and will error if the nStart is specified.

Yes.
Function HB_AT(...) of Harbour is equivalent to the function AT() of XHarbour.

But if you link xhb.lib, using AT(...) with Harbour also give the same results.