From:	j DOT aldrich6 AT genie DOT com
Message-Id:	<199605091349.AA117139764@relay1.geis.com>
Date:	Thu, 9 May 96 13:41:00 UTC 0000
To:	martyb AT ix DOT netcom DOT com
Cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Mime-Version:	1.0
Subject:	DJGPP as replacement for Power

Reply to message 9936511    from MARTYB AT IX DOT NET on 05/07/96  1:14AM


>Does anyone have any opinions about djgpp v. other DOS extenders?  I am

It's one of the best and most reliable.

>considering porting my 32-bit DOS app from Borland's PowerPack to a new DOS
>extender.  The app is an ATM adapter diagnostic that has a large number of
>driver-level functions, including some embedded assembler. What are the
>potential risks, benefits, pitfalls, etc?  How about debugging interrupt
>routines or displaying/changing virtual memory-mapped memory or I/O locations?

AFAIK, DJGPP makes it quite easy to do these things, but you MUST
learn to adapt your programming to a flat model, protected-mode style.
I'm not familiar with PowerPack, but you'd be advised to closely read the
DJGPP FAQ before attempting any interrupt or vmem-related programming.
Also, assembly under GCC uses a different syntax than that with which
most Borland programmers are familiar.

>How well does gcc work under DOS?  Are the DOCs adequate?

Perfectly.  It even gives you some basic Unix-like functionality that DOS
itself doesn't provide.  The docs are very well-written and there is a
wealth of readily available information and expertise in the FAQ and in
this discussion group.

John

- Raw text -