All off topic discussions go here. Everything from the funny thing your cat did to your favorite tv shows. Non-programming computer questions are ok too.
Hobbes wrote:Smeezekitty apparently doesn't care about scalability or portability, but IMHO that's exactly the point of this topic.
There's a crucial difference between being aware of an issue and ignoring it, or being unaware of an issue.
He said he's using "unsigned long", and that's 100% OK with me. But "because I am in real mode" isn't the right kind of reason for such a decision, and "so in 16bit you use long to get 32 bits" is dangerous advice.
Every good solution is obvious once you've found it.
I do know one that does not define int as 16 bits...
"Certainly avoid yourself. He is a newbie and might not realize it. You'll hate his code deeply a few years down the road." - Sortie
[ My OS ] [ VDisk/SFS ]
(and please, google .code16gcc before attempting to fail )
Last edited by Combuster on Thu Oct 29, 2009 8:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Certainly avoid yourself. He is a newbie and might not realize it. You'll hate his code deeply a few years down the road." - Sortie
[ My OS ] [ VDisk/SFS ]
"Certainly avoid yourself. He is a newbie and might not realize it. You'll hate his code deeply a few years down the road." - Sortie
[ My OS ] [ VDisk/SFS ]
Last time I looked, there was some experimental, somewhat unreliable, not officially supported way to make GCC produce "pure" 16bit code mentioned in the GNU 'as' documentation (.code16gcc), but certainly nothing I would use outside the GCC maintenance team.
Every good solution is obvious once you've found it.
@Solar, Counter-question: What's better supported: Turbo C++ 1.0 or .code16gcc?
Ah no, GCC still produces 32 bits code.
Ah the red herring. GCC emits binaries which run in 16 bit mode.
"Certainly avoid yourself. He is a newbie and might not realize it. You'll hate his code deeply a few years down the road." - Sortie
[ My OS ] [ VDisk/SFS ]
)](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}
