From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,86ec22e070e319c0 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: tmoran@bix.com (Tom Moran) Subject: Re: How do I get this to work?? Date: 1999/01/06 Message-ID: <3693091d.42725914@news.pacbell.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 429320410 References: <76s0dp$1v4$1@nntp3.uunet.ca> <76tbvv$ba5$1@nntp3.uunet.ca> <36926c54.2583014@news.pacbell.net> <76uvjt$o0f$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> X-Complaints-To: abuse@pacbell.net X-Trace: typhoon-sf.snfc21.pbi.net 915606131 207.214.211.80 (Tue, 05 Jan 1999 23:02:11 PDT) Organization: SBC Internet Services NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 23:02:11 PDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-01-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >there is loads of legacy code around >that assumes that an Address value can be passed to C as >a pointer. There is loads of legacy code around that makes all sorts of unwarranted assumptions, as you yourself have noted, I believe. It may well be that this compiler, when generating code for Win32, throws away the segment part. But I've seen an awful lot of code, some of it quite new, that assumes a 'address is equivalent to a 'access. I've even gone through the pain of fixing such code to make it work on other than the original coder's compiler. And how could you possibly make an embedded 32 bit program which actually used segments as intended, with a compiler that believed there was only one segment? Clearly such a compiler would truly be broken.