From: richard AT stardate DOT bc DOT ca (Richard Sanders)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: a few questions...
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 16:58:59 GMT
Organization: Rapidnet Technologies Internet
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <3419741a.16321879@news.rapidnet.net>
References: <5v87rt$2j4$1 AT kurica DOT wt DOT com DOT au> <0Zxy$AA7IBG0EwOE AT jenkinsdavid DOT demon DOT co DOT uk> <3418FCCA DOT 4166984E AT Mathematik DOT TU-Chemnitz DOT DE>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wlp14.rapidnet.net
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 12 Sep 1997 10:26:50 +0200, Robert Hoehne
<Robert DOT Hoehne AT Mathematik DOT TU-Chemnitz DOT DE> wrote:

->David Jenkins wrote:
->> 
->> I only ever run my stuff from Win95, I've recently discovered that
Win95
->> handles certain errors better than Dos does. See below about the
game
->
->Oh please do say such statements. The better wording would be
->
->Win95 silently ignores fatal errors better than DOS to let you
->think that Win95 has less bugs than DOS.
->
->To illustrate this simply run the following program
->and let me know if you think that it is OK to ignore
->such an fatal error:
->
(snip)

I use WIN 95 on a day to day basis to write my programs but load up
DOS and do the real testing from there. This can be quite an eye
opener.  Robert is correct in his assesment.