From: assemblywizard@gmail.com   
      
   Yep, used to have to do it... you take time slices from a processor   
   which is already time slicing, you have to synchronize to get good   
   performance, you force overhead on the processor to push and pull   
   registers on its stack... and there are strict rules to doing it   
   successfully enough to be able to turn out a retail product... if you   
   are just hacking about--a crash now and then is no real problem...   
      
   Most when they first learn enough assembly to be dangerous see   
   everything as an assembly problem, after about 20 years of professional   
   paid programming and gaining senior status, you spend a lot of time   
   doing such things...   
   Most of the time, you will want to call kernel code and let the   
   processor handle things for you, usually much more efficient unless you   
   have a team of senior programmers you can spare... only time assembly is   
   a real shinning star is the example I provided--that is, when there is   
   simply no other way to accomplish the task, in windows the api is very   
   complete... if you just built a new printer, scanner, camera, mp3   
   device, etc... you will need at least the ddk to begin and possibly, you   
   may even need to drop to assembly to accomplish a task... in linux there   
   are similar libraries which are available from 3rd party vendors which   
   have been well road tested and debugged...   
      
   Warmest regards,   
   John   
   "Marco van de Voort"  wrote in message   
   news:slrnda1jla.2qig.marcov@snail.stack.nl...   
   > On 2005-06-03, John Smith  wrote:   
   >> Windows will NOT grant you to call those (well, unless you like   
   >> crashing   
   >> rebooting machines), what OS would you have us run those on, I even   
   >> believe Linux is smart enough to deny you--unless you allow "suicide   
   >> mode?"   
   >>   
   >> John   
   >>   
   >> "Marco van de Voort"  wrote in message   
   >> news:slrnda0pll.tje.marcov@snail.stack.nl...   
   >>> On 2005-06-03, F Verbeek  wrote:   
   >>>> In the obscure news:kFHne.184$VJ6.8276110@news.sisna.com,   
   >>>>  Someone calling himself John Smith   
   >>>>  suspiciously hiding as  uttered:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Please stop the top posting. You are messing up the quotes.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> no, it is assembly...  high level languages hande the int's for   
   >>>>> you...   
   >>>>> you are never required to know how to call up bios and dos int   
   >>>>> code...   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Interrupt calls are not an assembly invention. They are due to the   
   >>>> system   
   >>>> and OS architecture. You can do them in almost any language.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The registers type is a school example of a pascal construct. It is   
   >>>> defined in the dos unit as   
   >>>   
   >>> People interested in non-dos interrupts, see int80h.org   
   >   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > ..   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > ..   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   > .   
   >   
   > I never said anything about windows.   
   >   
   > And all OSes have these calls. However in modern OSes they are the way   
   > to   
   > call the kernel from userland. int80h is the traditional number used   
   > for   
   > this under Unix. Just like int21 is dos.   
   >   
   > P.s. annoying when sb has strange quoting habits and doesn't trim   
   > isn't it ?   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)