Sun 2002-11-10 18:04, Tobias Ernst (2:2476/418.15) wrote to andrew clarke:

 > 16-bit DOS is only working with smapi+msged. All other programs, 
 > especially hpt, are written with a philosophy about allocating buffers 
 > and so on that they won't work in 16-bit mode.

Is that also true for the JAM code in SMAPI?

 > As for 32-bit mode, only Watcom C++ and DJGPP (you forgot that one)
 > are relevant.

I'll install DJGPP soon.

 > As for 16-bit Msged: I was making the last release with Borland C 3.1 
 > (which is farily identical with Turbo C for what that matters), but I 
 > won't make any DOS releases any further except for 32-bit ones done 
 > with DJGPP. So if you want to become binary maintainer for DOS - just 
 > select the 16-bit compiler that suits you.

Ideally I'd like to leave out 16-bit DOS support entirely, but I'll aim at
keeping support for Borland C++ 3.1/Turbo C++ 1.0 because they are the most
popular.

 ac>> FreeBSD:
 ac>> gcc version 2.95 (free)
 ac>> Linux:
 ac>> gcc version 2.7.2 (free)

 > Well, both under FreeBSD and unter Linux you'll meet gcc 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 
 > 3.0, 3.1.

The above are all I have to test with.

 ac>> OS/2 32-bit:

 ac>> Borland C++ 1.0 (1993)
 ac>> Watcom C++ 11.0c (2000) (free)
 ac>> Metaware High C++ 3.2 (1995)

 > Only Watcom is relevant of these. The High C patches presumbably don't 
 > work at all. But the most relevant of all is EMX, which you forgot.

Do people still use EMX?  I was under the impression it was no longer being
actively maintained, but then again neither is OS/2 itself.  OK, I'll look
into installing that on the OS/2 box that I don't have yet...

 > But there is one basic thing I want you to understand. The way you are  
 > talking about it, especially about the BeOs thing, makes me think you 
 > pursue the wrong path to "portability2. Methinks you want to make a 
 > list of compilers you support, and on other compilers you simply will 
 > say the thing does not work.

No!  I agree entirely with your comments about portability, and I want to
support as many compilers/platforms as practically possible.  The list I
gave was merely a list of compilers that I have personally available to me
where I can test code.

 > All programs in the Husky suite ... are of a kind that the CAN be
 > written in ANSI C.

With a few exceptions, eg. opendir().  I'll probably write an opendir() for
systems without one at some stage.

-- mail{at}ozzmosis.com

--- Msged/NT 6.1.1