FreePASCAL is only capable of producing 32-bit code, whether or not
NASM is used (NASM also can use 386 assembler).
On 9/15/06, Daniel Franzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> well...i'm not exactly an expert in the subject but i've noticed that
> freepascal suports nasm output...and nasm can generat
well...i'm not exactly an expert in the subject but i've noticed that freepascal suports nasm output...and nasm can generate 16bit code...not sure if it is 286 real or protected mode code, altough it seems to be real mode (i've seen people writing bootloaders with nasm)
doesn't this fits the needs
I personally much prefer Debian, which is free in every form, easy to
install, and easy to use.
On 9/15/06, Arkady V.Belousov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> 15-Сен-2006 15:35 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alain M.) wrote to
> freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>
> >> Well i strongly prefer reactos in
I would expect Turbo PASCAL, but he never said for certain.
On 9/15/06, Arkady V.Belousov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> 14-Сен-2006 19:13 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Blair Campbell) wrote to
> freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>
> >> BC> I know for a fact that the OpenWatcom project
> >> BC> woul
Hi!
15-Сен-2006 15:35 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alain M.) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>> Well i strongly prefer reactos in that case, because i don't want to
>> pay more money to novell (the same company mentioned above) for using
>> linux then to microsoft for using windows.
AM> You d
Imre Leber escreveu:
>
> Well i strongly prefer reactos in that case, because i don't want to
> pay more money to novell (the same company mentioned above) for using
> linux then to microsoft for using windows.
You don have to pay Novell for using Linux!!! And I don't even think
that their's
Hi!
14-Сен-2006 19:13 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Blair Campbell) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>> BC> I know for a fact that the OpenWatcom project
>> BC> would welcome a PASCAL frontend to their toolset.
>> "Welcome"?! Who says you so? Michal definitely will not spend its time
>> to
Hi!
15-Сен-2006 02:59 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aitor Santamarэa) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
AS> There's (or was) also Oberon, a third step, but I know nothing about that.
AFAIK, Oberon is an dynamic _environment_, not static language.
--
Aitor Santamaría wrote:
> I agree, but getting free compilers for Modula-2 is EXTREMELY
> difficult (or at least it was when I was studying).
Modula-3 is here:
http://www.m3.org/implementations/
The page at http://modula3.elegosoft.com/ is in German. It says that
anyone interested in working on
>> and i do not get the point in an int21 handler in
>> emm386. because it already has an any-int handler!
>
> The way the V86 monitor now has to work is by intercepting all interrupts in
> protected mode.
> Then reissue the interrupt in V86 mode. when that interrupt comes back you
get an iret
> By implementing the int 21 interface in the V86 monitor, you would
> need only two processor mode switches per int 21h. Moreover it could
> run faster, because the protected mode code could be run in flat mode.
complete irrelevant optimization.
I'd be surprised if you could provide a relevant exa
>-Original Message-
>From: Eric Auer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 01:41 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: 32bit stuff
>
>
>hi, novell is by no means the only linux company,
Then I am a little reluctant/biased given the history of that company.
>and i do n
"Alain M." wrote:
> Disk access is a good example for how inefficient DOS actually is:
> Each access has to flow through at least half a dozen layers before
> it reaches the disk, and CON access has similar amounts of overhead.
Umm, other operating systems differ here? I don't think so.
Robert R
>-Original Message-
>From: Alain M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 07:45 PM
>To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] 32 bit
>
>
>
>Imre Leber escreveu:
>> Well I for one think that FreeDOS should move into the 32bit realm after
Well I think that an additional implementation of the int 21h interface in
emm386, running in protected mode would be a nice way to go.
Imre
>-Original Message-
>From: Alain M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 08:20 PM
>To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
15 matches
Mail list logo
