dhinds@portia.Stanford.EDU (David Hinds) (03/26/90)
From what I can tell, all the DOS C compilers that generate 386-specific
code require a DOS extender, meaning lots of $$. Are there any exceptions -
either compilers that can generate code to do the protected mode switches
themselves, or compilers that can generate real-mode 386 code? I know the
real-mode code would be cluttered up with all sorts of prefixes, but it should
still be faster and smaller than doing the same thing with 8088 instructions.
On a related note, Desqview claims to be compatible with the VCPI
specification for DOS extenders. Does this mean that Desqview IS a DOS
extender, for all practical purposes? For example, can I compile a program
for the Phar Lap DOS extender stuff, and just run it under Desqview? What
extra functionality do the DOS extenders provide?
-David Hinds
dhinds@popserver.stanford.eduralf@b.gp.cs.cmu.edu (Ralf Brown) (03/26/90)
In article <10518@portia.Stanford.EDU> dhinds@portia.Stanford.EDU (David Hinds) writes: } On a related note, Desqview claims to be compatible with the VCPI }specification for DOS extenders. Does this mean that Desqview IS a DOS }extender, for all practical purposes? For example, can I compile a program }for the Phar Lap DOS extender stuff, and just run it under Desqview? No, VCPI compatibility means DESQview will peacefully coexist with any program written using a VCPI-compatible DOS extender. If you compile a program for the Phar Lap DOS extender, you'll still need the Phar Lap extender. -- {backbone}!cs.cmu.edu!ralf ARPA: RALF@CS.CMU.EDU FIDO: Ralf Brown 1:129/46 BITnet: RALF%CS.CMU.EDU@CMUCCVMA AT&Tnet: (412)268-3053 (school) FAX: ask DISCLAIMER? | _How_to_Prove_It_ by Dana Angluin 3. by vigorous handwaving: What's that?| Works well in a classroom or seminar setting.