Morning Marcel,

> It used to be TASM (Turbo Assembler), but when Borland discontinued it
> and certain bugs made development difficult I switched to MASM
> (Microsoft Assembler). TASM was the far superior choice when I started
> out but fortunately MASM has caught up a bit in the meantime and now
> is up to the task.
Yes I was rather fond of the Borland tools myself, they simply worked much 
better in my opinion, but as the years went by, support dropped off or became 
non-existent, Borland changed name and then back again... Oracle stopped 
supporting Borland compilers and basically, the standards went down hill. Sadly.

>> Well, the ld man page says it could work, but in practice... who
>> knows.
Well, if we can't get different Windows object files to link together, I'd say  
the chances are slim - but as I haven't tried this yet, I'm not saying that it 
won't work! Stranger things have happened.

> No, that's an entirely different topic. Object file linking could
> work, but this of course does not change the fact that it uses a lot
> of Win32 API calls.
Looking more like we need to update wine rather than convert QPC. (I think I 
saw this in another email from you actually!) and by 'we' I wasn't implying 
that you should do it!

> Yes, but that problem was only the installer, which was programmed in
> Turbo Pascal. Its runtime library had a notorious bug which resulted
> in the described problem when ran on a too fast PCs.
Aha, I had forgotten that and now you mention it, it was the installer - old 
age I'm afraid is ruining the last few working bits of Organic RAM that I have 
left! Apologies for slandering QPC.

> > I may be able to use the CVS version for free though - but I cannot
> > get to that URL from here. Will try later at home if Alison gives me
> > some play time!

> Well, but if you're concerned that you don't have enough time to give
> Cedega a quick spin then I'm not sure you're ready to port QPC,
True, but I wasn't expecting to become familiar with it overnight! :-)

> something that is certainly equivalent to a fulltime job for a few
> months ;)
I expected nothing less!

> > (vmWare) Completely unworkable I'm afraid.

> Strange, the performance I've heard of is far better than that.
I know people here at work who use it from home, but they have huge amounts of 
RAM and latest Code Duo processors etc etc - they can make it work, but  they 
too have pretty large load times. It could be down to the Windows build we use 
here at the agency - slightly customised for 'security' purposes!


Cheers,
Norman.
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Reply via email to