Hi!
I think some more explaining is necessary...
[me]
>> What if someone writes a mapper support driver for DOS1? Shouldn't be too
>> hard. Programs could even install such a driver themselves so that they
>> can switch the mapper using a single interface.
[Jon De Schrijder]
>I rather prefer to install the DOS2 memory mapper support routines in DOS1
>environment. That would be very easy for programmers.
Jon and I are probably talking about the same thing, but giving it
different names.
The official term for what I mean is "mapper support extended BIOS". It can
be used with or without DOS2, although I think it was introduced as part of
DOS2.
>From the DOS2 programmers manual:
>A program can use the extended BIOS calls for the mapper
>support to obtain these addresses. The calls are provided
>because these addresses may be changed in the future version,
>or to use mapper routines other than MSX-DOS mapper support
>routines.
[Eric Boon]
>Ehm... I thought MemMan was just that. A mapper support driver for
>DOS1 and 2...
Again this is about names: MemMan is _a_ mapper support driver, but I was
talking of one that uses the same calling conventions as the DOS2 mapper
support.
Using a driver that implements the "mapper support extended BIOS", a
program could install that driver and do all mapper calls without worrying
about what DOS version it runs under.
If implementing the complete "mapper support extended BIOS" is too much
trouble, we could take a subset and make a driver for that. A possible
subset is "only the direct paging routines". That is enough to solve all
the problems concerning mapper ports. Routines to reserve and free segments
are not needed unless you want to run TSRs.
Bye,
Maarten
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put
in the body (not subject) "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the
quotes :-) Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] (www.stack.nl/~wiebe/mailinglist/)
****
