Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/09/30/12:14:41

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$1 AT solomon DOT cs DOT rose-hulman DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: 938691374 21315 (30 Sep 1999 11:36:14 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT netvision DOT net DOT il
NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 Sep 1999 11:36:14 GMT
X-Sender: eliz AT is
In-Reply-To: <7su41v$a4q$>
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 -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019