Date:	Fri, 08 Dec 2000 08:49:26 +0200
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id:	<2950-Fri08Dec2000084925+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.6
In-reply-to:	<3A302D69.8020107@home.com> (message from Russ Magee on Thu, 07
	Dec 2000 17:38:01 -0700)
Subject:	Re: Porting DJGPP DPMI Apps-->Borland C++5.x
References:	<3A302D69 DOT 8020107 AT home DOT com>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> From: Russ Magee <rmageeNO_SPAM AT home DOT com>
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.os.msdos.djgpp
> Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 17:38:01 -0700
> 
> Is this going to be a problem? My (limited) understanding is that DPMI is
> just an API for accessing DOS calls from protected mode.

That's true.

> What changes,
> visible at the C-language level, will typically have to be made to make
> a DJGPP/DPMI app compile in Borland C?
> 
> Specifically, setting up registers, pointer declarations, data struct size
> limits...

``Setting up registers'' hints of system-level programming: invoking
interrupts directly from the application, examining DOS data
structures, etc.  These aspects are very different between the two
environments: the functions' names differ (__dpmi_int vs int86), the
rules for writing interrupt handlers differ, and I think the runtime
environment (registers loaded by the compiler, memory layout) differs
as well.

> (This didn't look to be covered in the FAQ

Why should a DJGPP FAQ explain how to convert code from DJGPP to BC?

- Raw text -