X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 13:23:07 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT gnu DOT org>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <7137-Sat10Jul2004132306+0300-eliz@gnu.org>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to: <354933d6.0407092314.376127b0@posting.google.com>
	(gohyongkwang AT hotmail DOT com)
Subject: Re: Recommend use of __dpmi_int over int86?
References:  <354933d6 DOT 0407092314 DOT 376127b0 AT posting DOT google DOT com>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: gohyongkwang AT hotmail DOT com (Goh, Yong Kwang)
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
> Date: 10 Jul 2004 00:14:35 -0700
> 
> So in short, can I say that in general while developing program under
> 32-bit DJGPP, I should use __dpmi_int instead of int86 instead

In general, yes.

> int86 is only left behind for backward compatibility for some old
> 16-bit code?

It is mostly for backward compatibility, but it is also for invoking
protected-mode interrupt handlers (whereas __dpmi_int invokes the
real-mode interrupt handler).