Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
From: Nate Eldredge <nate AT cartsys DOT com>
Subject: Re: DJGPP TSR and C++'s new command
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 19:03:13 -0700
Message-ID: <19980515020310.AAB15760@ppp123.cartsys.com>
Precedence: bulk

At 01:02  5/14/1998, Charles Sandmann wrote:
>> Since writing a TSR requires DPMI 1.0 calls, this would mean that you use 
>> either CWSDPMI or 386Max, is it correct?
>
>The current prot mode TSR example does not use any DPMI 1.0 calls, so 
>should run under most DPMI providers.
>
>> So I would advise to stay clear of memory allocation inside an interrupt.
>
>This is good advice.  If you knew for sure what the maximum number of 
>allocations was going to be, by malloc/free'ing that memory it would not
>require a call back to sbrk() and might work.  Might, since the reentrancy
>issues.

But if you can do that, then you could just `malloc' it ahead of time and
hand it out with your own routines (and it could be as simple as a stack
implementation). So it's probably not worth the trouble.

Nate Eldredge
nate AT cartsys DOT com