On , Auke Reitsma (2:281/400.20{at}fidonet) wrote: 

 > Busy and lack of energy ... I know what you mean :-( Same here, though the
 > energy problem may have a different cause. Or maybe not. I've had warnings.

Auke...

  Best to get it checked early. OTOH, I've adopted a new motto, paraphrased
from Mark Twain, "The rumors of my survival have been greatly
exagerated."

 RS> Yes, I have some of your stuff and some corrections to your older stuff.

 > Well, if it includes 'DYNAR', scrap it. It is a piece of junk. Update in 
 > the make. Actally finished, but it may get a few enhancements. I'm using 
 > it in a current project. I'll email it to you when I'm satified with it, 
 > or post it here if it is used by something else I'll be posting. (Or 
 > both.)

  I've looked, but I don't seem to have that one.

 RS> One of the big changes I'm considering for this next release is to split
 RS> out all the DOS stuff into its own archive.

 > Might be a good idea. OTOH, if it means losing some good ideas I'm not so 
 > sure ...

  None of the good ideas, but I'll be losing a lot of the code with int86()
and intdos() calls. Most of 'em don't work under Windows anyway. Although I
still do a lot of work with embedded DOS, the rest of the world could
probably live quite happily without this stuff - which will always be
available anyway, only in a separate archive.

 > As I've reasoned before: don't worry about the size! If it takes a few MB 
 > it will still be grabbed...

  As noted, size isn't the driving force in this. Most of this is mature
code that's unlikely to change. Also, in a world run on Windows, it's
simply clutter. 


--- QM v1.00