Mail Archives: djgpp/1995/05/06/06:26:41
> Recent replies indicate that one has to intercept the DOS critical
> error handler etc. Why is all this neccessary in DJGPP ?
>
> I wrote a simple program in Turbo Pascal (flame war on the horizon?)
> which lets you change drives to load stuff. Using the DOS routine
> ChDir lets you change to, say, the A: drive and testing a variable
> (DosError) tells you if an error occurred & what it was. There is no
> "abort/retry/fail" garbage involved, just an internal error number....
>
> Considering how simple TPascal really is, and that it uses standard
> DOS interrupt calls to do routines (like ChDir), can't DJGPP perform
> the ChDir function in a similar (graceful) way ?
>
> I realise this discussion list is not meant for arguments about DJGPP
> vs. other languages, etc. but why use overkill and intercepts when
> there is a simpler solution ?
>
> (I do love DJGPP, despite this rant...)
> Mark Wodrich.
> --
> _/_/_/_/_/ _/ Mark Wodrich
> _/ _/ _/ _/ Electrical Engineering Student
> _/ _/ _/ _/ University of Cape Town
> _/ _/_/_/_/_/ Cape Town, South Africa.
>
> "I'm gonna stick a quotation in here REAAAL soon ..."
>
Just as a guess, as I haven't used TPascal in quite a few years (since I
learned C), TPascal probably revectors the critical error handler itself.
Borland's products, to date, have always been fine for PC's, albeit not
always portable to other platforms.
Regards,
Perk
- Raw text -