2008/9/28 Der kleine Beitrag eines Computeranwenders (Users)
>> Geraldo, the parameter here is to describe how your *hardware* is,
>> which is most likely to be 437.
>> If you put a 850 there, you are saying that your hardware already has
>> 850 encoded, and thus you wouldn't ever need to use MODE CON.
> Excuse me, but is there any hardware at all that is not 437? 437 is the
> orignal IBM-PC's codepage, used in the BIOS. Everything is in English (US)
> language when an IBM-PC boots up.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_page_437
> It doesn't make sense to me to tell an OS for an IBM-PC what the hardware
> codepage is, when there is only one possibility anyway.
> Please correct me if I'm not getting the point here.
> Greetings,
> Andreas.

Hello Andreas,

Apparently not, as we can read in one of my favourites posts on this
topic by Matthias Paul (from whom we haven't read much lately, and
that hopefully will be there ;)).


Another suggestion why BIOS is NOT always 437 is the fact that I am
just cloning Microsoft interface, and Microsoft is giving you the
option to tell what it is.

But even if you were true, it could also have a function. It allows
you to use a "software" version of CP 437 (in which charcters may look
a bit "nicer" than in BIOS do, I seem to recall that Henrique has
tried this in his CP file packages). This way, if you leave that space
empty at DISPLAY commandline, you tell it that you do not KNOW which
is your codepage. And if you PREPARE a 437 codepage, when you SELECT
it, DISPLAY does not get confused and knows that it should use the
PREPAREd one, rather than the hardware one.


This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
Freedos-user mailing list

Reply via email to