From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: problem with far pointers
Date:	Thu, 30 Sep 1999 13:37:27 +0200
Organization:	NetVision Israel
Lines:	17
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.990930133709.20873L-100000@is>
References:	<7ssgdl$pg AT cs DOT vu DOT nl> <7sssfq$rds AT acp3bf DOT knirsch DOT de> <7su41v$a4q$1 AT solomon DOT cs DOT rose-hulman DOT edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	is.elta.co.il
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	news.netvision.net.il 938691374 21315 199.203.121.2 (30 Sep 1999 11:36:14 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT netvision DOT net DOT il
NNTP-Posting-Date:	30 Sep 1999 11:36:14 GMT
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
In-Reply-To:	<7su41v$a4q$1@solomon.cs.rose-hulman.edu>
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Damian Yerrick wrote:

> Shouldn't movedata() be called farmemmove() or farmemcpy()?

I don't think so.  `movedata' was modelled on its Borland namesake
which accepts two far pointers.  If you want to rename it to
`farmemmove' or some such, you'd need to reverse the source and
destination arguments, to make it consistent with `memmove'.

> Maybe someone could put true far pointer support
> (a la Borland) into DJGPP.

That would require extensive changes to GCC (and probably GAS as
well).  It doesn't seem like a worthwhile investment of energy,
especially since in C++ you can overload the operator [] with a call
to _far* functions.

- Raw text -