Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!ernie.Berkeley.EDU!maddox
From: maddox@ernie.Berkeley.EDU (Carl Greenberg (guest))
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Turbo C vs. Library function names
Message-ID: <21127@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Sun, 4-Oct-87 04:04:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.21127
Posted: Sun Oct  4 04:04:00 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 7-Oct-87 05:00:12 EDT
References: <9130@ut-sally.UUCP> <1652@killer.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: maddox@ernie.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Carl Greenberg (guest))
Organization: Lunatic Berkeley Laboratories
Lines: 17
Keywords: How do you pre-empt them?

In article <1652@killer.UUCP> richardh@killer.UUCP (Richard Hargrove) writes:
>If you look in DOS.H, you'll discover that peek() is first declared as a
>function and then #defined as a macro. Could there be a conflict between
>the use of your own peek() function and this macro definition ?

In my Hercules graphics library that I've been fiddling with (I have set
function in assembler, a fast line drawing algorithm, clear screen, that's
it) I #undef peek and poke at the beginning before doing anything with them.
And they don't seem to work on that segment except when you go into a memory
model that supports far pointers...  WAAAH.  I suppose if I put EVERYTHING
in assembler things will go OK, but not yet anyway...  I hate going that low
level...
								Carl
/----------------------------------v------------------------------------------\
| Carl Greenberg, guest here       | "I have a very firm grasp on reality!  I |
| ARPA:  maddox@ernie.berkeley.edu | can reach out and strangle it any time I |
| UUCP: ...ucbvax!ucbernie!maddox  | want!"                         - Me      |