Vince L wrote: > On Sunday 03 June 2007 12:43, James Knott wrote: > >> Anyone here remember doing assembly code in DEBUG? Many years ago, >> someone wanted a DOS utility that would just return an error code and do >> nothing else. I wrote one in assembler, using DEBUG, and it was only 5 >> bytes long. The same thing in Turbo C, came in at a few K bytes. >> > > A lot of that depends on what library elements get compiled in by default, > and > how much you could strip that down. If you wrote the core of this > functionality in a separate C file, the size of the resulting object file > would be more indicative - the trick would be either to compile main() > without all of the overheads, or find a shortcut to invoke the requested > function, and link that instead. > I was just learning about C programming at the time, so neither trick would have been known to me. I also learned about the "fun" of variable sizes. In class, we were using Borland's Turbo C++ for DOS. At home, I was using Borland C++ for OS/2. I'd do my homework and it would run fine on OS/2, but fail when I got to class, because of the difference in integer size etc.
-- Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
