Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!proto!doug
From: doug@proto.com (Doug Huffman)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: Intel 386 C
Message-ID: <1991Jun15.094142.10958@proto.com>
Date: 15 Jun 91 09:41:42 GMT
References: <1234@ocsmd.com> <4097@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.UUCP> <1991Jun13.231255.7781@proto.com> <1991Jun14.020902.29929@netcom.COM>
Organization: Prototronics @ Sandpoint, Idaho
Lines: 21

feustel@netcom.COM (David Feustel) writes:

>Two questions:
>1) Is Intel's compiler DPMI 0.9 or 1.0 compliant?
>2) Are you SURE the Zortech's dos extender is DPMI compliant?
>2a) If so, again, 0.9 or 1.0?

1)  I can't find my brochure on Intel right now so I don't know for sure
that they even make a claim one way or the other.

2)  Well... since I wrote it I'm as sure as anyone is likely to be (without
blind faith).  It passes the Zortech compiler and runtime library test 
suites while running under Windows 3.0 in all modes (therefore:  It is 
DMPI 0.9 complaint), you can hook hardware and software interrupts with it 
under Windows, etc, etc.  Any specific test you have in mind?

2a)  I just got the 1.0 spec the other day.  I don't see any thing that looks
like a problem after my first couple of passes through the spec.  I don't
have a 1.0 host to test it with -- yet.

doug@proto.com