Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!world!goodearl
From: goodearl@world.std.com (Robert Goodearl)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: Windows 3 segment/selector problems (Tech. Quest.)
Message-ID: <1990Dec21.195518.24580@world.std.com>
Date: 21 Dec 90 19:55:18 GMT
References: <1990Dec19.194631.22880@progress.com> <4563@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> <600@rodan.cs.utexas.edu>
Distribution: comp
Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die
Lines: 13

In article <600@rodan.cs.utexas.edu> nickel@cs.utexas.edu (Jody P. Nickel) writes:
>This isn't pretty but... And I'm sure Microsoft won't condone it. The pointer
>returned will always be an XXXX:0000, where XXXX is the selector for the
>first 64K of the memory. To get to the next 64K you need to increment the
>selector by (I'm not %100 of the value) 8. The easiest way to do this is
>using the _based keyword and a far *; 

If you _were_ going to manipulate the segment register yourself, you would add
16 NOT 8.  HOWEVER, this is specifically recommended against.  You CAN declare
huge pointers without compiling entirely in the huge model.  I believe this
is much better than trying to manipulate segment registers yourself.
-- 
Bob Goodearl -- goodearl@world.std.com