As far as I know, it is just for assembler, not C... (but nice all the
same!).
I did some experiments in the past with Nomyso till JWASM appeared
(motivated by the fact that older JEMM only compiled under MASM).
Aitor
2012/4/11 Bernd Blaauw bbla...@home.nl
Op 11-4-2012 20:25, Rugxulo schreef:
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Michael B. Brutman
mbbrut...@brutman.com wrote:
On 4/11/2012 9:17 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
I don't understand the changing OSes and compilers due to arbitrary
limitations comment. Are you saying that people are being forced to
move away from OW because there
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Michael B. Brutman
mbbrut...@brutman.com wrote:
For hard-core application programming where you need to use a few BIOS
and DOS interrupts I like to use C and C++ (carefully). C gives you a
tremendous amount of control and flexibility.
Open Watcom is open
Op 11-4-2012 20:25, Rugxulo schreef:
(PS: If we have FreeDOS code that doesn't compile under OW I'd be
interested in seeing it. A few #defines can fix a lot of problems. The
debugging is the hard part.)
There is a tcc2wat library by Blair Campbell on iBiblio, if anyone
wants to take a
On 4/11/2012 1:25 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Michael B. Brutman
mbbrut...@brutman.com wrote:
For hard-core application programming where you need to use a few BIOS
and DOS interrupts I like to use C and C++ (carefully). C gives you a
tremendous amount of
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Michael B. Brutman
mbbrut...@brutman.com wrote:
On 4/11/2012 1:25 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Michael B. Brutman
mbbrut...@brutman.com wrote:
For hard-core application programming where you need to use a few BIOS
and DOS
For hard-core application programming where you need to use a few BIOS
and DOS interrupts I like to use C and C++ (carefully). C gives you a
tremendous amount of control and flexibility.
My two favorite compilers are:
Borland Turbo C++ 3.0 for DOS: I did most of my early mTCP work. It
On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 9:50 PM, Ralf A. Quint free...@gmx.net wrote:
At 12:06 PM 4/6/2012, Eric Auer wrote:
DJGPP is a free open DOS port of GNU C/C++ and OpenWatcom C is
also pretty open. None of the Turbo things are open, although
some were free in the Borland Software Museum for a while. Now
At 02:59 PM 4/6/2012, Rugxulo wrote:
Also see Gautier's Transparent Language Popularity Index (updated
each month):
http://lang-index.sourceforge.net/
Sorry, but as far as programming for (Free)DOS is concerned, that
list is completely irrelevant...
Ralf
2012/4/6, Alex alxm...@gmail.com:
Just to be clear, which is the best Pascal version available to date
for FreeDOS?
Perhaps TP 3.0 - maximal effect taken out of minimum of code?
#v+
Turbo Pascal 3 for MS-DOS was released in September 1986. Being
version 3, there were lesser releases prior to
2012/4/6, Alex alxm...@gmail.com:
What, in your view, are the best production-ready languages currently
available to FreeDOS users?
Don't forget various Forth variants.
By production-ready I also mean that they must have a minimal set of
libraries...
Depends, what actually you mean by
At 04:45 PM 4/6/2012, Alex wrote:
On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 12:41 AM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
16-bit is dead, no machines are made purely 16-bit anymore. AMD64 long
mode doesn't (properly) support 16-bit at all, and popular compilers
like GCC never cared to support it. Also, people
At 05:05 PM 4/6/2012, Zbigniew wrote:
2012/4/6, Alex alxm...@gmail.com:
Just to be clear, which is the best Pascal version available to date
for FreeDOS?
Perhaps TP 3.0 - maximal effect taken out of minimum of code?
#v+
Turbo Pascal 3 for MS-DOS was released in September 1986. Being
version
At 08:32 PM 4/6/2012, Rugxulo wrote:
For more than half of those languages, there doesn't exist a (at
least serious) DOS implementation.
You rather have to use what is available, and that is fairly limited...
There is easily an implementation for more than half of those, but
often it's
14 matches
Mail list logo
