Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 16:12:12 +0400 (MSD)
From: "Alexander V. Lukyanov" <lav AT video DOT yars DOT free DOT net>
Message-Id: <199610201212.QAA10524@video.yars.free.net>
To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
Cc: T DOT W DOT Seddon AT ncl DOT ac DOT uk, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: need advice on djgpp vs. Turbo C

> On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Alexander V. Lukyanov wrote:
> 
> > Are you serious? I don't think huge pointers can make life much easier
> > in BC, since NO LIBRARY FUNCTIONS can take such pointers,
> 
> I don't think this is correct.  A huge pointer is just a 32-bit pointer, 
> so any function which expects a far pointer should work.  It is true that 
> if that function handles a buffer, you still cannot pass it a buffer or a 
> data structure which is more than 64KB long, but that's all there is to 
> it.

I meant quite that. Huge pointers was introduced to handle huge
structures, and since library functions can't handle them what's the
use of huge pointers? read,write,memcpy etc have to be rewritten with
huge pointers to allow normal using of huge arrays.

> > I once tried to port a my unix program to dos using BC and huge
> > pointers - it was a nightmare.
> 
> Nightmare: yes; impossible: no.

It became possible after rewritting some library functions.