Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

nuclear war (Miscellaneous)

posted by tkchia Homepage, 18.11.2022, 00:38
(edited by tkchia on 18.11.2022, 00:56)

Hello kerravon,

> Thanks for clearing up that mystery!!!
> Does this look correct to you?
> https://sourceforge.net/p/pdos/gitcode/ci/master/tree/pdpclib/dosstart.asm#l72
The best way to test your code is probably not to ask Internet randos. :-) Get an actual 16-bit C compiler, then test your code against an actual C compiler. This is how stuff is done.

(However, if your code is not working — for some reason — and you have trouble figuring out why it is not working, or if you have trouble figuring out how to test it in the first place, then maybe we can help there.)

If you want your startup code to work with Turbo C++ (e.g.) what you can try to do is to replace the startup module (probably c0t.obj, c0h.obj, etc.) on the linker command line with your own. Or if you are thinking of linking up with code from a different C compiler, then try replacing the startup module from that, etc.

I do not suppose you have actually found a public domain (N.B.) C compiler for x86-16 that actually knows about the various memory models? If there is such a thing I am sure the community here (me included) would be super-interested to know.

> > > Was the purpose of a new OS design so that if it
> > > did become popular, Commodore could lock people
> > > in somehow?
> > Huh? Not everything is a deliberate conspiracy to squeeze more money from
> > customers. After all, you yourself created a new C-level API that is
> At the moment I am not claiming that what I did
> was the right thing to do. I wasn't actually
> aware of what came before besides people calling
> int86x and POSIX, neither of which I liked. And
My original point was that not everything that corporations do should be attributed to nefarious intent. If you can easily end up doing the same things without nefarious intent, then why not other people?

At the end of the day, programming is a very crass, pragmatic endeavour. No amount of verbiage can change that, and maybe that is just as it should be. When your code is deployed, it either works, or it does not. So you try your best to ensure that your code works on whatever machines it is meant to run on.

So I will not be surprised if a lot of design decisions, such as recent versions of Windows requiring x86-64's with certain CPU features, turn out to be due to practical considerations.

Thank you!

---
https://gitlab.com/tkchia · https://codeberg.org/tkchia · 😴 "MOV AX,0D500H+CMOS_REG_D+NMI"

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22049 Postings in 2034 Threads, 396 registered users, 92 users online (0 registered, 92 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum