Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/12/17/15:00:21
Martynas Kunigelis wrote:
> guilty. Again, sorry, didn't mean it. However, weren't you supposed
> to use MK_FP(0xa000,0) under Borland instead of the 0xa0000000 hack? :)
MK_FP() was a convenience function that did the same thing. Both
methods are non-portable, but you had a choice. On the other hand, all
graphics are non-portable so it's not too important if the program used
a higher-level API to manipulate the low-level graphics accesses. If
the accessing routine were poorly written in-line with the portable
code, then changing platforms from 16-bit to 32-bit (and vice-versa)
systems will be very unfriendly. And 16-bit compiler just BEG to have
non-portable code written for them. -grin-
- Raw text -