Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cwjcc!hal!ncoast!roland
From: roland@ncoast.UUCP (Roland Wilcher)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: PL/M
Keywords: software development
Message-ID: <12324@ncoast.UUCP>
Date: 1 Sep 88 23:02:17 GMT
References: <17377@gatech.edu> <373@seila.UUCP>
Reply-To: roland@ncoast.UUCP (Roland Wilcher)
Organization: Cleveland Public Access UN*X, Cleveland, Oh
Lines: 19

In article <373@seila.UUCP> don@seila.UUCP (Don Kossman) writes:
>
>i've used both PL/M and C to do system programming directly on
>Intel iron and using iRMX-[2]86.  There is absolutely NO reason to use
>PL/M; it just happens to have been the first language beyond asm86 
>that Intel developed.  It's got a few built-ins to handle segment
>descriptors, I/O registers, and interrupt procedures, but these 
may be easily constructed in assembler in a few hours and may then
>be forgotten.  It may also still be true that Intel only provides
>complete iRMX interface libraries for PL/M; again, it is simple
>to write the required assembler routines and then do everything
>in C.  (I probably still have these around, let me know if you
>need them).
>
>usenet:  ...sun!tsunami!seila!don, ...uunet!mahendo!jplgodo!seila!don
If you are a member of irug you probaby can get the RMX[x]86 interface
library for C. I used this library on an rmx-86 project. It allows for
most operating system calls to be done easily in c (rqcreatetask etc.).
I got it from a local Intel distributor .