Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 11:52:43 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: gcc 3.0
In-Reply-To: <199905271859.SAA137296@out5.ibm.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990530115215.12571A-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Thu, 27 May 1999, Mark E. wrote:

> > But if GCC supports something like __attribute__((interrupt)), then I
> > agree we should go for that.  I'm not privy enough to GCC/EGCS
> > developments to know whether in fact such an attribute exists.
> > 
> 
> It does for several targets.

That's good news.

> Would this be something that would work the same for all x86 targets? 

Probably not.  At least the wrapper code is DPMI- and DJGPP-specific
in some of its aspects.  I think.