DOS ain't dead

8086 rules (Miscellaneous)

posted by kerravon, Ligao, Free World North, 21.02.2024, 13:36

I think we are talking cross-purposes.

Wikipedia says:

> > In reality, almost all DOS application programs violated these rules

As opposed to:

Because no DOS-extenders existed, it doesn't make
any difference whether a DOS program
followed Intel's rules or not, because any code that
was written needed to be recompiled into the
DOS extender format or to some other OS format.
In fact, everyone here at Wikipedia thinks that
Intel must have been on the wacky weed when they
wrote their irrelevant (as opposed to difficult
to follow and rarely followed) rules.

> With a DOS Extender or by using any protected mode operating system of your
> choice.

Which, as above, makes the rules irrelevant.

BFN. Paul.

Complete thread:

• 8086 rules - kerravon, 21.02.2024, 07:24 (Miscellaneous)
  • 8086 rules - Japheth, 21.02.2024, 09:03
    • 8086 rules - Rugxulo, 21.02.2024, 10:38
    • 8086 rules - kerravon, 21.02.2024, 11:02
      • 8086 rules - Ringding, 21.02.2024, 11:56
        • 8086 rules - kerravon, 21.02.2024, 12:06
      • 8086 rules - Japheth, 21.02.2024, 15:16
        • 8086 rules - Ringding, 21.02.2024, 15:24
  • 8086 rules - mceric, 21.02.2024, 11:07
    • 8086 rules - kerravon, 21.02.2024, 12:02
    • 8086 rules - kerravon, 21.02.2024, 13:36
    • 8086 rules - CS writing, lDebugX - ecm, 21.02.2024, 14:57
  • 8086 rules - bretjohn, 21.02.2024, 17:40
    • 8086 rules - kerravon, 21.02.2024, 23:35