mdlawler@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael D. Lawler) (03/26/91)
I've heard rumor that MS-DOS 5.0 might not support the INT 21H function
3701H set switchar. Maybe if enough people voice their opinions to
Microsoft this will be left in. I can see no reason to remove this
function and several to leav it in. If this function is removed
MS-DOS will lose a degree of portability. Any program written to
use this function will not work. Also this function makes it easier
for people to migrate between operating systems. I personally don't
believe that there is any justification for the removal of this choice!
disclaimer these opinions do not necessarily represent Ball State
University!
--
Mike Lawler UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!mdlawler
ARPA: mdlawler@bsu-cs.bsu.eduscott@cs.hw.ac.uk (Scott Telford) (03/27/91)
In article <12571@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> mdlawler@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael D. Lawler) writes: >I've heard rumor that MS-DOS 5.0 might not support the INT 21H function >3701H set switchar. Maybe if enough people voice their opinions to >Microsoft this will be left in. I can see no reason to remove this >function and several to leav it in. If this function is removed >MS-DOS will lose a degree of portability. Any program written to >use this function will not work. Also this function makes it easier >for people to migrate between operating systems. I personally don't >believe that there is any justification for the removal of this choice! I agree entirely. IMHO the only good thing about DOS is that it can almost look like a brain-dead sort of Unix. However, Microsoft seemed to lose interest in Unixifying DOS after v2.0 was released. I suppose it's too late now for Microsoft to start putting Unix-compatible things into DOS (they don't do Xenix anymore, so they've probably forgotten that Unix exists :^) but there's no excuse for them taking the few compatibility features out, even if it is undocumented. At this rate, they'll be taking the pipes and redirection out of COMMAND.COM next... _____________________________________________________________________________ | Scott Telford, Dept of Computer Science, scott@cs.hw.ac.uk | | Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK. scott%hwcs@ukc.uucp | |_____ "Expect the unexpected." (The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy) ______|
rkl@cbnewsh.att.com (kevin.laux) (03/28/91)
In article <2633@odin.cs.hw.ac.uk>, scott@cs.hw.ac.uk (Scott Telford) writes: > In article <12571@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> mdlawler@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael D. > Lawler) writes: > >I've heard rumor that MS-DOS 5.0 might not support the INT 21H function > >3701H set switchar. Maybe if enough people voice their opinions to > >Microsoft this will be left in. I can see no reason to remove this > >function and several to leave it in. If this function is removed > >MS-DOS will lose a degree of portability. Any program written to > >use this function will not work. Also this function makes it easier > >for people to migrate between operating systems. I personally don't > >believe that there is any justification for the removal of this choice! > > I agree entirely. IMHO the only good thing about DOS is that it can > almost look like a brain-dead sort of Unix. However, Microsoft seemed > to lose interest in Unixifying DOS after v2.0 was released. I suppose > it's too late now for Microsoft to start putting Unix-compatible things > that Unix exists :^) but there's no excuse for them taking the few Wait a minute here. Who said anything about *removing* function 3701? My understanding is that DOS 5.0 (like 4.0) just IGNORES checking what the switchar actually is (like xcopy has been doing for even longer). -- ________________________________________________________________________________ R. Kevin Laux Email: rkl1@hound.att.com AT&T Bell Labs Voice: (908) 949-1160 Holmdel, NJ 07733 Fax: (908) 949-0959
Greg.Smith@p11.f477.n104.z1.METRONET.ORG (Greg Smith) (03/31/91)
In a message to All <30 Mar 91 12:46> Scott Telford wrote: ST> From: scott@cs.hw.ac.uk (Scott Telford) ST> Date: 27 Mar 91 12:35:41 GMT ST> Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Heriot-Watt University, UK. ST> Message-ID: <2633@odin.cs.hw.ac.uk> ST> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc >>I've heard rumor that MS-DOS 5.0 might not support the INT 21H function >>3701H set switchar. Maybe if enough people voice their opinions to Is that the function to set the / to a - for command line options? Anyways, not many programs use it, and many programs support -'s as the switch anyways as it's preferred by most people. (I support either char.) ST> compatibility features out, even if it is undocumented. At this rate, ST> they'll be taking the pipes and redirection out of COMMAND.COM next... And taking 99% of their profits with them! I just wish we could trick them into documenting the undocumented features so that they would have to keep them! Greg.Smith@bohemia.metronet.org --- XRS!% 4.10DV * Origin: Avatar or bust! (Quick 1:104/477.11) -- ============================================================================= Greg Smith - via MetroNet node 200:5000/301 The Bohemia BBS System, Boulder Colorado (303)449-8946 UUCP: Greg.Smith@p11.f477.n104.z1.METRONET.ORG or : ...!boulder!bohemia.METRONET.ORG!1!104!477.11!Greg.Smith =============================================================================