Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!dali.cs.montana.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!unixhub!stanford.edu!leland.Stanford.EDU!jessica.stanford.edu!aaron From: aaron@jessica.stanford.edu (Aaron Wallace) Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer Subject: Re: Huge pointers in BC++ Message-ID: <1991Apr22.162836.24655@leland.Stanford.EDU> Date: 22 Apr 91 16:28:36 GMT References: <1991Apr19.172703.24638@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1991Apr19.221458.12071@ccad.uiowa.edu> Sender: Aaron Wallace Organization: Academic Information Resources Lines: 29 In article <1991Apr19.221458.12071@ccad.uiowa.edu> cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI) writes: >From article <1991Apr19.172703.24638@leland.Stanford.EDU>, by aaron@jessica.Stanford.EDU (Aaron Wallace): >> Hi! I just got my Borland C++, and in general it looks real nice for Windows >> stuff. I'm trying to move over some stuff from MS C 6 to BC++ and have a >> question: I use huge pointers a lot in my code to go through GlobalAlloc'd >> blocks of memory. I noticed that BC++ by default implements huge pointers >> in a way that is certain to cause UAEs under protected mode. There's a >> switch for "fast" huge pointers that may implement them correctly, but >> I can't say. Does BC++ correctly use the __ahincr to do huge arithmetic? >> I'd assumed it does--how else could you say it does Windows if it doesn't? >> Now I'm not certain, and my program that otherwise worked fine when compiled >> with MSC dies when compiled with BC++. Well, to be fair it only dies when it >> goes near huge pointers, but I can't be sure what the exact cause is. >> >> If the answer is RTFM, which FM? > >As far as I know, you can't use the BC++ with its Huge pointers in Windows. >I don't have my manuals here at my office, but I do remember reading >something like this. Using the fast huge pointers did seem to work after all--the UAEs were cause by an infinitely more embarassing "bug" (Yes, I confess, I *thought* I had told BCC+ to make everything exportable...!) Anyway, BCC+ seems to work like a charm--why can't Microsoft write compilers? Do they actually use their own? Maybe that's why it takes them so long to come out with new software... Aaron Wallace