Message-ID:	<gH6P+gAx7j9yEwNg@darkblak.demon.co.uk>
Date:	Mon, 3 Feb 1997 19:39:29 +0000
To:	opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
From:	"Ian 'DrDebug' Day" <Ian AT darkblak DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
Subject:	Re: [opendos] speeding up command.com
In-Reply-To:	<s2f5dd7c.004@bielbit.bielsko.pl>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Sender:	owner-opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net

In article <s2f5dd7c DOT 004 AT bielbit DOT bielsko DOT pl>, Bartosz Polednia
<bartosz AT bielbit DOT bielsko DOT pl> writes
>> Question:
>> OpenDOS is for x86 processors, right?
>> THEN WHO THE HELL NEEDS IT TO BE PORTABLE?????????
>> You're not going to break things by inserting a little ASM code - >
>> it's not like it'll run on the Mac anyways :) :) :)
>> And who's going to be running the command.com from Linux???  Go
>> ahead and make things fast!
>
>Hi,
>
>#1.
>  What kind video card do you want to implement direct writes for ?
>     If it is VGA, what about all Hercules, EGA, CGA users ?

Both types.  There's only two base addresses and only a few more if you
include pages.  It's a simple concept that most text mode programmers
have dealt with.

>#2.
>  Maybe we can use some 386, 486, 586 or MMX specyfic opcodes inside
>Open DOS. Executables will be smaller and faster but all machines
>with less than (386...MMX) could be dropped into trash.

The more correct solution would be to put processor specific code inside
conditional constructs, so you could compile up for what you want.

DrDebug

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ian 'DrDebug' Day         | Email:           Ian AT darkblak DOT demon DOT co DOT uk
Dark Black Software Ltd.  | WWW:      http://www.darkblak.demon.co.uk
The Home of MrDebug       | Dark Knight BBS & Fax: +44 (0)1480 471465
(THE Clipper debugger)    | Tel:                   +44 (0)1480 403104
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Turnpike evaluation. For information, see http://www.turnpike.com/

- Raw text -