| www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| From: | eplmst AT lu DOT erisoft DOT se (Martin Stromberg) |
| Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
| Subject: | Re: WDOSX |
| Date: | 25 Apr 2000 07:51:52 GMT |
| Organization: | Ericsson Erisoft AB, Sweden |
| Lines: | 20 |
| Message-ID: | <8e3iqo$i6j$1@antares.lu.erisoft.se> |
| References: | <38ff20bd$0$58948 AT SSP1NO17 DOT highway DOT telekom DOT at> <39045ED0 DOT 3F417452 AT dasoft DOT org> |
| NNTP-Posting-Host: | lws256.lu.erisoft.se |
| X-Newsreader: | TIN [version 1.2 PL2] |
| To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
| DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
| Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
Tom St Denis (tom AT dasoft DOT org) wrote: : It's a really stable dos extender two main features over CWSDPMI : 1) Compressed executables : 2) It binds directly into your program, so no 'two exe' distributions : The cons: : 1) No virtual memory : 2) If you actually distribute more then one exe CWSDPMI takes less : space. Why is it that if the extender can be bound to the executable, it doesn't support virtual memory (like PMODE/DJ and WDOSX) while those which can't be bound does support virtual memory (like CWSDPMI)? Genesis, Wind and Wuthering, MartinS
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |