Xref: news-dnh.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:1490
Path: news-dnh.mv.net!mv!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!sgiblab!goonsquad.spies.com!uuwest!alcyone!max
From: max AT alcyone DOT darkside DOT com (Erik Max Francis)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Re: Assembly and others
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 95 09:30:09 PDT
References: <DD55KE DOT tF AT jade DOT mv DOT net>
Organization: &tSftDotIotE
Lines: 21
To: djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Dj-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

sulyokp AT dragon DOT klte DOT hu (Sulyok Peter) writes:

> max AT alcyone DOT darkside DOT com <Erik Max Francis> wrote:
> 
> > DOS programming has never been compiler-independent.
> 
> I'm afraid it's only your opinion. 
> If you browse include files of Borland, Microsoft, Symantec and Watcom,
> you will find the common part (i.e. common types, macros, functions)
> of these. There is a lot of commercial C library which uses this common
> part of these.

Borland and Microsoft have similar, but consistently different 
interfaces.  Like I said, DOS programming has always been 
compiler-dependent -- by definition, since there is no official standard.


Erik Max Francis, &tSftDotIotE // uuwest!alcyone!max, max AT alcyone DOT darkside DOT com
San Jose, CA, USA // 37 20 07 N  121 53 38 W // GIGO, Omega, Psi // the 4th R!
H.3`S,3,P,3$S,#$Q,C`Q,3,P,3$S,#$Q,3`Q,3,P,C$Q,#(Q.#`-"C`- // kmmfa // folasade
_Omnia quia sunt, lumina sunt._ // mc2? oo?  Nah. // http://www.spies.com/max/