Date:	Thu, 17 Feb 2000 05:43:16 +0600 (LKT)
From:	Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel <kalum AT crosswinds DOT net>
X-Sender:	root AT darkstar DOT grendel DOT net
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: <Damian Y> Re: It's back, but the ...
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.10.10002170542210.801-100000@darkstar.grendel.net>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread
:)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 19:24:13 +0600 (LKT)
From: Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel <kalum AT crosswinds DOT net>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: <Damian Y>  Re: It's back, but the ...

On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Damian Yerrick wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Feb 2000 04:17:07 GMT, "Andrew Jones"
> <luminous-is AT home DOT com> wrote:

> >32-bit protected-mode DOS,
> 
> Any better than DJGPP?

Yes It is. 

One of the biggest diappointments I had/have with DJGPP was that it is
unable to use nearptrs with memory protection. 

In Watcom thanks to its split flat memory model with mapping of the 1 st
MB of space, I was able to use the "char * screen= 0xA0000" way of writing
code. which made porting apps very easier and also kept all the memory
protection intact.

And when I read the DJGPP v1.0 code I found that a similar selector was
there to enable linear access to < 1mb memory. But when I got DJGPP v2.x I
found that this way of acessing memory is not allowed and one would have
to use the unsafe nearptr method which disables all memory protection.


So as you can see 32-bit protected mode extended dos is better in
DOS4GW/WATCOM than DJGPP in this case. Because AFAIK in this specific
instance I can in watcom use the "nearptr's" _with_ all the memory
protection of protected mode intact.

Regards,
Kalum

Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread
:)
^^^^ please help me by setting me as your signature since Damian Yerrick
is out to get me with Mcafee....Please, just one kind djgpper.. help.....

- Raw text -