Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

KBFR 1.9 beta discussion opened by CM (Developers)

posted by Ninho E-mail, 13.06.2011, 12:17

[I'm transferring this argumentative thread to the Developers' section rather than Announcements!]

>> brand new int 15h method is used to communicate with an installed
>> instance of KBFR.

CM wrote :
> I'm not a fan of overloading interfaces with magic values like that.
>Your interface still contains some unused fields?

Good morning ?

As I wrote, I shall document the whys and hows of this imho neat and secure interface. And indeed some fields are reserved for further uses. And there is cause for "overloading" 15/4F, and for the choice of al=F4 too. You might want to wait before blindly hammering at it all :=)

skimming and quick answering

> orgint15's address is hardcoded in the uninstaller. Why? ...
> The trans function still isn't inlined, as you noted in the comments.
Implementation details which do not affect function, and might or might not change between versions.

Although the communications interface itself is generic enough to allow for passing a number of parameters, as a rule I won't to turn the resident into a chemical factory.

As the resident's effective size happens to be now an integral # of "paragraphs", I felt little incentive to inline trans ... for no gain ;=)

>Your interrupt handler still isn't using the interrupt sharing protocol.
>Your uninstaller still doesn't walk interrupt sharing protocol handler >chains and doesn't query AMIS TSRs for their chain entries.

Won't do. Size matters :=)

> You sometimes discard the saved flags by returning with "retf 2" from an > interrupt handler.
Not "sometimes", it's in the one place iirc - where it returns from the API call. Are you suggesting I made a mistake ? I don"t think so.

> Your arguably ineffectual critical section protection doesn't appear to be >necessary any longer, as you aren't using any data in the freed area. You >can use 21.49 to free the previous PSP's area then.
>You still free the environment only inside the (non-)critical section, and >manually. I'd use 21.49 again.

I thought we discussed this at length, and I thought I'd won the argument. Apparently not ? Anyways, I'm content with how it stands.

>Where it says "calculate resident size", the calculation always appears to >yield the same value

I know, you've told this N times ! It's in my development version already.
Implementation trifle again!

>Still not checking for errors after 21.48. Can't happen?

Appropriate checks are added as I reestablish auto highloading. I have to verify things will default to working properly under old (pre MS DOS 5 e.g.) DOS versions as well.

>I guess that's all for now.

You might have chased a few typos, too... just kidding. Thanks for the punctilious peeking !

--
Ninho

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22049 Postings in 2034 Threads, 396 registered users, 253 users online (0 registered, 253 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum