Re: [Freedos-user] confirmation and compiler

On Thu, 09 Nov 2017 19:10:31 -0600, Rugxulo wrote: > You say it's as good as DJGPP (as far as maintenance), but that's not > true at all. I think it's pointless arguing over this matter. Desmet-C is, as far as I checked, a reasonably looking C compiler that is able to produce working

[Freedos-user] Desmet C 3 archived and put on Github

Hi I think I have figured out what goes where, though I'm not sure. I've only done a quick "hello world" test, but it looks like it works **if you stay in the same directory.** Doing "c88 -I " didn't seem to work. Anyway, here's desmet c with a tiny install (just the programs), a complete

Re: [Freedos-user] confirmation and compiler

Hi, On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 7:25 PM, Random Liegh via Freedos-user wrote: > > I don't see Desmet C replacing GCC or Watcom, but it would be nice if it > could be nursed into a spot where it can replace the > hard-to-get-legitimate-copies-of Borland (vestus

Re: [Freedos-user] confirmation and compiler

On 11/9/2017 5:10 PM, Rugxulo wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Ralf Quint wrote: >> On 11/8/2017 6:07 PM, Rugxulo wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Ralf Quint wrote: On 11/8/2017 10:26 AM, Jim Hall wrote: > Not

Re: [Freedos-user] confirmation and compiler

There's also PCEM, which emulates the XT, PC JR and early AT (286). If something that can target those machines (eg Desmet) falls into our laps ...then why not? On 11/9/2017 4:24 PM, Rugxulo wrote: Hi, Just to clarify On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Rugxulo wrote:

Re: [Freedos-user] confirmation and compiler

On 11/9/2017 4:10 PM, Rugxulo wrote: Hi, On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Ralf Quint wrote: On 11/8/2017 6:07 PM, Rugxulo wrote: On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Ralf Quint wrote: On 11/8/2017 10:26 AM, Jim Hall wrote: Not sure why DeSmet

Re: [Freedos-user] confirmation and compiler

Hi, Just to clarify On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Rugxulo wrote: > > There's nothing wrong with supporting 8086, and I still like it. But > it's far from burdensome to require 386 these days. Heck, we're > already a million years beyond that. Most developers don't even

Re: [Freedos-user] confirmation and compiler

Hi, On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Rugxulo wrote: > >> The shareware version is equivalent to the pre-ANSI 2.51 version. > > Yes, I know that, and it's literally dated circa 1989, so that's > understandable. However, even the modern "release" has .EXEs that are > no newer

Re: [Freedos-user] confirmation and compiler

Hi, On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Ralf Quint wrote: > On 11/8/2017 6:07 PM, Rugxulo wrote: >> >> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Ralf Quint wrote: >>> On 11/8/2017 10:26 AM, Jim Hall wrote: >>> Not sure why DeSmet wasn't well received long

Re: [Freedos-user] confirmation and compiler

On 11/8/2017 6:07 PM, Rugxulo wrote: > Hi again, > > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Ralf Quint wrote: >> On 11/8/2017 10:26 AM, Jim Hall wrote: >> >>> Not sure why DeSmet wasn't well received long ago, but I think this is >>> a Good Thing to see. I'd love to see DeSmet