Re: 16 bit windows.

["John E. Davis" <davis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

SANGOI DINO <SANGOID@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>2) support for watcom compiler on WIN16. this changes makefile.all,
>slconfig.h, slposdir.c, and slang.h (!!), the change to slang.h is the most
>problematic, it lowers the value of SL_KEY_ERR. I do it only for 16 bit
>system, to avoid breaking compatibility for other systems.
>(note that also slang 1.4.9 has the same problem)... in SLang it is used
>only twice: as return value for SLkp_getkey(), tuncating the value to an
>int, and checked in slcurses.c: get_keypad_key()). but applications can use
>it... so it scares me a bit...

What about using
   
      #define SL_KEY_ERR 0xFFFFU

to make it unsigned?  

>But the big question is: should we still support 16 bit systems? on DOS we
>can use a dos extender (openwatcom can use some)... for window 3.1 can we
>use win32s? this restricts execution to 386+, but does impose extra limits
>on operating systems.

A number of years ago,  jed worked on 16 bit systems.  But then at
some point I ran into the 64K limit on global data.  My feeling is
that this wil ultimately prove to be a show stopper.

Thanks,
--John

--------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to <jed-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx> with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body.
Need help? Email <jed-users-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx>.