INTL 3:770/1 3:770/3
REPLYADDR cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid
REPLYTO 3:770/3.0 UUCP
MSGID:  45af3a80
REPLY:  e3fbb193
PID: SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
On 2024-11-27, The Natural Philosopher  wrote:

> On 26/11/2024 17:37, Josef Möllers wrote:
>
>> On 25.11.24 18:33, mm0fmf wrote:
>>
>>> My eyes! My eyes! That was COMPACT model code, so 64k of code and 1MB
>>> of data, code addresses were 16bit offsets to the CS reg and data was
>>> far so 32 bits of segment and offset of DS or ES. And of course you
>>> had to be extra careful of any pointer arithmetic as a far pointer
>>> wrapped after 64k. You had to use slower HUGE pointers to get
>>> automatic normalisation. God it was shit.
>>
>> And to consider that, at that time, processors like MC68000 or NS32016
>> were readily available.
>
> Backwards compatibility.
> DOS came from 8080 based CP/M , to run on an 8086, to where 8 bit code
> could be easily ported.
>
> And so we were stick with that architecture.

Intel put the "backward" in "backward compatible".

--
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Growth for the sake of
\ /        |  growth is the ideology
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  of the cancer cell.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Edward Abbey

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
 * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
SEEN-BY: 10/0 1 103/705 105/81 106/201 124/5016 128/187 129/305 153/757
SEEN-BY: 153/7715 218/0 1 601 700 840 870 930 220/70 221/1 6 360 226/17
SEEN-BY: 226/30 100 227/114 229/110 111 114 200 206 300 317 400 426
SEEN-BY: 229/428 470 550 616 664 700 240/1120 266/512 267/800 282/1038
SEEN-BY: 291/111 292/854 301/1 113 812 310/31 320/219 322/757 335/364
SEEN-BY: 341/66 342/200 396/45 460/58 633/280 712/848 770/1 3 100
SEEN-BY: 770/330 340 772/210 220 230 902/26 5020/400 1042 5075/35
PATH: 770/3 1 218/840 221/6 301/1 218/700 229/426