Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:23774 comp.unix.xenix:8579
Path: utzoo!attcan!sobmips!uunet!samsung!shadooby!sharkey!indetech!fiver!palowoda
From: palowoda@fiver.UUCP (Bob Palowoda)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: Separate data and function address spaces
Message-ID: <935@fiver.UUCP>
Date: 16 Nov 89 08:31:20 GMT
References: <25604050.26537@ateng.com>
Organization: Fiver Communications  Fremont, Ca
Lines: 24

From article <25604050.26537@ateng.com>, by chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg):
> According to cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill):
>>According to chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg):
[some stuff deleted]

> Unlike SysV, SCO Xenix/286 and Xenix/386 versions 2.2 and 2.3 create
> disjoint code and data segments.  The exceptions are called "impure"
> binaries.  I've never seen impure binaries except for the '286/186/8086,
> and such 16-bit binaries limit code and data to a total of 64K.
 
   Does this mean the the 386 version (a 32bit version of Xenix) has 
limitations on huge array sizes?  I was under the impression that the
386 version of Xenix C compilier was a non-segmented 32bit compilier 
in all respects.  Other than the 32bit int's pointers etc. What are the
other features that are different than the 286 version of the Xenix 
compilier?

---Bob

-- 
Bob Palowoda  pacbell!indetech!palowoda    *Home of Fiver BBS*  login: bbs
Home {sun|daisy}!ys2!fiver!palowoda         (415)-623-8809 1200/2400
Work {sun|pyramid|decwrl}!megatest!palowoda (415)-623-8806 2400/9600/19200 TB
Voice: (415)-623-7495                        Public access UNIX XBBS