Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:8228 comp.sys.ibm.pc:13270
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!ames!ucsd!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!jack!crash!gof
From: gof@crash.cts.com (Jerry Fountain)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: MSC Danger (was Re: Turbo C vs Quick C)
Message-ID: <2682@crash.cts.com>
Date: 16 Mar 88 05:49:31 GMT
References: <389@lscvax.UUCP> <567@naucse.UUCP> <2946@dasys1.UUCP> <1082@dutesta.UUCP> <304@wsccs.UUCP>
Reply-To: gof@crash.CTS.COM (Jerry Fountain)
Organization: Crash TS, El Cajon, CA
Lines: 29
Keywords: near far large small mixed


In article <304@wsccs.UUCP> terry@wsccs.UUCP (terry) writes:
>In article <1082@dutesta.UUCP>, knop@dutesta.UUCP (Peter Knoppers) writes:
>> 
>> Why, oh why don't the .obj files in MSDOS contain some bits telling
>> the linker whether a function in the .obj file expects to be called
>> with a FAR or a NEAR call. This can prevent accidentally linking
>> modules compiled for different models.
>
>
>  [lots more stuff deleted that don't really apply to this comment :-]
>

Digging around in the .obj file I did run across an interesting item.  MSC 
*does* include a flag in the .obj to indicate the model for which the file
was generated.  The bad part is that only placed in the .obj for Xenix 
compatibility.

(from MS-DOS encyclopedia, pg. 659)

COMENT record (0x88), comment class 0x9D  

Hope this clears up this minor point...The info is there, LINK just ignores it.


-- 
-----Jerry Fountain-----
UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd,sdcsvax,nosc}!crash!pnet01!gof   ARPA: crash!gof@nosc.mil
MAIL: 523 Glen Oaks Dr., Alpine, Calif. 92001         INET: gof@pnet01.CTS.COM