Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!shelby!portia!dhinds
From: dhinds@portia.Stanford.EDU (David Hinds)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer
Subject: 386-Specific Compilers, DOS extenders
Keywords: Compilers, 32 bit, i386
Message-ID: <10518@portia.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 25 Mar 90 19:41:34 GMT
References: <1990Mar19.175316.16898@Octopus.COM> <3130@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov> <1990Mar25.011155.21658@athena.mit.edu>
Sender: David Hinds <dhinds@portia.stanford.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 14


    From what I can tell, all the DOS C compilers that generate 386-specific
code require a DOS extender, meaning lots of $$.  Are there any exceptions -
either compilers that can generate code to do the protected mode switches
themselves, or compilers that can generate real-mode 386 code?  I know the
real-mode code would be cluttered up with all sorts of prefixes, but it should
still be faster and smaller than doing the same thing with 8088 instructions.
    On a related note, Desqview claims to be compatible with the VCPI
specification for DOS extenders.  Does this mean that Desqview IS a DOS
extender, for all practical purposes?  For example, can I compile a program
for the Phar Lap DOS extender stuff, and just run it under Desqview?  What
extra functionality do the DOS extenders provide?

 -David Hinds
  dhinds@popserver.stanford.edu