Mail Archives: djgpp/2002/04/29/10:01:17
> It's not "limited" to Win32 any more than DJGPP is limited to a DOS
> environment. Win32 just *is* its environment. Among the platforms
> perceived by those interested in the "professional
> industrial-strength" you mention later, Win32 is a lot less limiting
> as an interface to them than DOS is. DOS support on NT-based
> platforms exists, but it can be a royal pain to use.
Uhhhh... limited... let's see here ... I take my DOS program and try in on
Windows 3.1. Does it run? Yup. Not limited here. OK now try Win95. Ooops ...
still runs. Hmmmm... not limited yet. WindowsNT... DPMI shakes hands... yup
still runs. Seems like runs pretty much everywhere. Good solution.
Win32 app... lets see here... Ooops DOS can't run it. My friend's old Win
3.1 laptop won't stand for it either. Have we found a UNIX Dosemu that runs
Win32 apps? Uhhhh... who did you say was limited?
> > and having to tote the cygwin dll's everywhere you want to run your
> > app, not to mention having a whole second DJGPP installation.
> > Applications compiled with DJGPP/Cygwin DO NOT run under DOS. What
> > is the purpose of using DJGPP, then?
> You're massively confusing things. There is no such thing as
> "DJGPP/Cygwin". They're two independent project. One is a port of
> GCC and tools to DOS, the other a port of the same tools wo Win32.
> Cygwin is not a "second DJGPP installation" --- it's a second version
> of all the major GNU tools.
Does it make a difference? The end result is the same and you are just being
> > Better of using native M$ Visual C for professional industrial-strength
> > Windoze development, sorry.
> Well, take care what you ask for --- the devils might decide that you
> should get it.
> Anyway: nobody in this thread was asking for "professional" or
> "industrial-strength", IIRC.
You're right here :-) I don't like M$ any more than you, believe me. But if
I am going to play, I prefere volleyball and not sitting at a computer,
thank you very much.
- Raw text -