From: muta...@gmail.com   
      
   On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 11:30:08 PM UTC+8, wolfgang kern wrote:   
      
   > >>> No. On a real 8086. The x'66' will be ignored. So a real    
   > >>> 8086 and PM32 will both work, right?    
   > >    
   > >> Not sure why you want a 16 bit operand in PM32.    
   > >    
   > > I'm trying to do 16-bit programming with a bigger    
   > > EFFECTIVE shift than 4 bits.    
   > >    
   > >> the 66 "may"    
   > >> be ignored by 8086/88, could be an alias for other as well.    
   > >    
   > > How can it be an alias on an 8086?   
      
   > would need to remove several layers of dust from my collection    
   > of Intel books to check if it is mentioned at all.    
   > the code 0x60..group could be alias for 0x70.. or 0x50..    
   > similar to 0x82 which is (was until 2000) an alias for 0x80   
      
   This question was never resolved.   
      
   Someone has appeared who is trying to run PDOS/86 on a   
   360k floppy on his PC AT.   
      
   So that's 80286 instead of 8086/88.   
      
   1. Can we get a result from this machine, or does that have   
   no bearing on the XT?   
      
   2. If the answer to the above is "yes", can you suggest a test?   
      
   Thanks. Paul.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)