X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From: Rugxulo <rugxulo AT gmail DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: GNU Emacs 22.3 and Vista
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 14:56:46 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <be6da634-5c75-4fcd-96ea-9e77349621e1@b16g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
References: <c6f1ce2a-c0a9-45ec-992f-1e2925f53a72 AT r28g2000vbp DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<uk564jmew DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <7b67b41d-4ec9-4d49-9e15-2b2db729e8cf AT 3g2000yqk DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<ueiwcji5g DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <e9d6710f-e784-4d0e-90a2-deda66c286e5 AT e3g2000vbe DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<u4ox7kafm DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <83fxgoda43 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <c7c81398-f473-42b4-b6d9-2d3c4bedfc59 AT g37g2000yqn DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<83ws9t358x DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <6fe30866-6add-4c07-93dc-47e56462a597 AT z9g2000yqi DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<200904092147 DOT n39LlMfW024105 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.13.115.246
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1239314206 16705 127.0.0.1 (9 Apr 2009 21:56:46 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 21:56:46 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
Injection-Info: b16g2000yqb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.13.115.246; 
	posting-account=p5rsXQoAAAB8KPnVlgg9E_vlm2dvVhfO
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.64 (Windows NT 6.0; U; en) Presto/2.1.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hi,

On Apr 9, 4:47=A0pm, DJ Delorie <d DOT  DOT  DOT  AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> > P.S. In fact, to come completely clean with yet another (horrible /
> > crazy) idea, why not include Freemacs in GNU Emacs as well? Hey, it's
> > GPL, it runs on 8086s, and it's smaller than even one single
> > Changelog! (Okay, obviously RMS would complain that it uses TASM, but
> > hey, that can be fixed if really desired.) No, I don't honestly expect
> > this to happen, but it's not really that bad an idea, is it??
>
> /me wonders if it could be modified to build with djasm...

Of course. Even though DJASM misses a few opcodes, as long as you can
emit raw bytes, it should work. Heck, GAS supports 16-bit now (and
obviously NASM works too). And technically it could support building
with all of them, why not? (Then again, to put it mildly, TASM code is
pretty TASM-specific, but hey, that's what disassemblers are
for!)    :-)