Adrian Ives wrote: > But what I would really like is some kind of document that sets out a list > of things that fall in the category: "This should work under QDOS, it says > it should, but it doesn't but we went ahead and fixed it in SMSQ"
Where does it say it should work under QDOS? I guess this wasn't consciously "fixed" in SMSQ/E, it's probably more a side effect of the new implementation. And documenting all possible side effects borders on the impossible, unfortunately. > This is not just for me, but for any other poor sod who has to try > developing system level code to run under both platforms. This is > not the first time that I've encountered things that should work > under QDOS but don't, yet they work fine under SMSQ. Supporting QDOS is a pain, yes. That's why I usually just don't do it ;-) > Further down my list is to start testing under Minerva. I'm dreading it. :( Actually, Minerva was a damn good OS, you'll probably have much less trouble there than with any QDOS version. Seeing that Minerva is free now I cannot think of a single reason why people even with old black boxes still use QDOS (nostalgia excluded). Marcel _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
