home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   comp.lang.pascal.borland      Borland Pascal was actually pretty neat      2,978 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 2,298 of 2,978   
   Dr J R Stockton to Matt Claessen   
   Re: [FAQ] mini-FAQ V1.68 - essential rea   
   09 Nov 06 11:15:36   
   
   From: jrs@merlyn.demon.co.uk   
      
   In message <45524b6e$0$752$5fc3050@dreader2.news.tiscali.nl>, Wed, 8 Nov   
   2006 22:26:11, Matt Claessen  writes   
   >"Dr J R Stockton"  wrote in message   
   >news:u4id9IxJthUFFw5v@invalid.uk.co.demon.merlyn.invalid...   
   >   
   >> BP7.01 was designed for DOS 6 or thereabouts.   
   >>   
   >> It worked for me in a Win98 DOS box (PII/300, 64MB RAM).   
   >>   
   >> It seems usable, but not right, in a Win XP CMD.EXE box (P4/3G, 1GB RAM).   
   >> IDE will edit & compile, but not run, programs, ISTM.   
      
   Seems OK now !!   
      
   >BP 7.0 works fine on my P4 3.2 GHz 1 GB machine with Windows XP SP2.   
   >Both BPW.EXE and BP.EXE compile and run DOS programs, in real and protected   
   >mode.   
      
   In that case, there would appear to be a difference between our settings   
   - and such a dependence is FAQworthy.   
      
   If there is support for such a section (especially from Robert!), I   
   suggest that a draft section be composed and debated here, and put in   
   the FAQ when it appears to have converged.  That will save unnecessary   
   creation of FAQ editions.   
      
   Even a statement of "no problem in XP" has its uses.   
      
   When in 1998 I bought a Win98 machine I noted the statement in FAQ 3.1   
   "My computer has more than 64Mb of memory ..." and was content to get   
   only 64MB.  I did wonder whether that would matter on the new WinXP 1GB   
   machine ...   
      
      
   WinXP DOS box sizing appears to have changed since Win98.  That seems to   
   confuse BP a little if the box size differs from BP's setting, as   
   regards save/restore/show the "non-BP" screen.   
      
      
      
      
    For many years, I have unzipped with XALL.EXE, free from (probably)   
   a Pascal magazine.  XALL is easy to type, better than UNZIP.  Works on   
   486/33, worked on PII/300 where unfixed BP7 Crt programs gave RTE200.   
   But, on P4/3GHz,   "Runtime error 200 at 089F:0D0B." !!   Search of the   
   code for "untim" fails, but search for "unt" shows (Text part of Hex   
   view) :   
      
    ;<=>?uRunti ¤me   
    error   at?av.??   
     P=Fon ßs Copyri   
    ghF(c +) 1983,92   
     Bßl?+and(+Fg+ ]   
      
   So I guess XALL is a BP7.00 program, patched in a primitive manner for   
   RTE200 @ 200MHz, and compressed to be self-extracting.    
      
   --   
    (c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK.   ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk   Turnpike v6.05   MIME.   
      TP/BP/Delphi/&c., FAQqy topics & links;   
        RAH Prins : c.l.p.b mFAQ;   
      Timo Salmi's Turbo Pascal FAQ.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca