--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 239 C LANGUAGE Ref: F3J00002 Date: 03/14/98 From: BOB STOUT Time: 01:42am \/To: BILL BIRRELL (Read 2 times) Subj: Hmmmmf! On , Bill Birrell (2:2504/200@fidonet) wrote: > Is "object-oriented-programming" what in the dim and distant past we used > to call "data-driven-programming"? Bill... Kinda, sorta... > If so, maybe there's some use to it. :-) Yeah, but all the best parts make so much sense that they'd fit in almost any paradigm. --- QM v1.00 * Origin: MicroFirm : Down to the C in chips (1:106/2000.6) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 239 C LANGUAGE Ref: F3J00003 Date: 03/14/98 From: BOB STOUT Time: 01:45am \/To: JASEN BETTS (Read 2 times) Subj: What is Snippets? On , Jasen Betts (3:640/350@fidonet) wrote: RS> Like yours, [Thad's] version uses continued fractions. Unlike yours, it RS> is not recursive. Thad also made his PD, a requirement for SNIPPETS. > Yeah, I see, basically the same except it uses a stack (in a local array) > instead of recursion, does everything with doubles (insted of long ints), > and recalculates at each continuation step, instead of running until it > thinks it's close enough like mine does. > I feel that MAX_LENGTH could be (sizeof(long double)*BITSPERBYTE) as each > step is responsible for atleast 1 bit of precision. that'd make it even > more bulletproof than it already is. > any comments? A worthwhile suggestion - thanks! It's still PD, though... ;-) --- QM v1.00 * Origin: MicroFirm : Down to the C in chips (1:106/2000.6) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 239 C LANGUAGE Ref: F3J00004 Date: 03/12/98 From: ANTHONY TIBBS Time: 06:26pm \/To: PHILIP LINDBORG (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: Ehhr.. XMS..? PL> use the memory above 640Kb.... Right now I trie to programm (I'm not a PL> very good programmer...) a little game, where you see everything from PL> above (like Red Alert, but not that good)... And I need alot memory PL> for images, viritual screens, sounds, maps and so on... PL> The problem is that i use farcalloc() to allocate memory, and this PL> function doesn't give me enoung memory.... I think it is EMS or XMS PL> memory I should use... but how do I allocate XMS or EMS (or whatever PL> it should be) memory to my program, and how do I read/write from/to PL> it? PL> I have a Borland C++ 3.1 compiler (DOS). Well, yes, you can use EMS/XMS, however it would probably be a lot better to use a DOS extender (thus taking care of this automatically). If you don't, your images will generally be limited to 64k in size. Take care, Anthony Tibbs ... Reality-ometer: [\........] Hmmph! Thought so... --- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] * Origin: The Tibbs' Point - Ottawa, ON, Canada - Pvt (1:163/215.38) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 239 C LANGUAGE Ref: F3J00005 Date: 03/14/98 From: RUSS WUERTZ Time: 07:06am \/To: NAVIN PAI (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: Has Anyone? Hello Navin, On 06 Mar. 98 13:54 Navin Pai wrote to Russ Wuertz... NP> On 03-03-98 06:18, Russ Wuertz & Edward Brophy were talking about NP> Re: Has anyone? NP> RW> Disk Operating System, or just Operating System 2, is RW>Bios dependent right? NP> wrong. no operating system is bios dependent. every NP> operating system is processor dependent; indirectly or NP> directly it is hardware dependent. NP> RW> It has the BOOT up CODE that puts certain certain RW>routines into memory right at boot up, that can be later RW>used as interupts. NP> the code stored in firmware is the code which does a whole NP> lot of things rather than just providing the routines for NP> the users to be called as interrupts functions. it's up to NP> the user to whether he should use the routines provided NP> by the bios or do the direct control of peripherals himself. NP> NP> RW> In other words the C code we write uses the routines in memory. RW> Cfunction() RW> { RW> int 14 RW> ret RW> } RW> RW> That function would be Operating System dependent and can be run o RW>on the operating system that uses that interupt routine. NP> the above function would be allowed to run on the os which allows NP> to access the bios functions directly. for eg. consider the case NP> of unix os running on a ibm clone. unix also uses the bios NP> fuctions provided by the firmware but it does not allow NP> programmers to access the bios interrupts instead it handles NP> these interrupts itself and provides the programmer equivalent NP> functions for those interrupts. this function is ok on dos, os/2 NP> and windows as it allows programmer to access the bios functions. NP> bye, |\ |_ | \ | | * | \|~|\/||\|, Nagpur, India NP> ___ NP> * PW * Fun, fun, fun, 'til her daddy takes her Blue Wave away! NP> NP> -!- Maximus/2 3.01 NP> ! Origin: Kalptaru Net India. http://www.kalptaru.com . (6:606/31) NP> NP> Let me say this about that: BIOS = Basic Input Output System. We "USED" to have MS-BASIC at BOOT-UP. We USED to have to program our IBM-PC ourselves. That BIOS can be genericly called a Programable Read Only Memory chip that contains firmware. When we switch on our computer it takes hold of what happens. If you make one of those firmware chips you would have to boot the computer and then put it where the user could take hold of it and use all those assembly functions in the firmware in more simple BASIC or object code form. Basic took those assembly routines in memory and used them in more simple form. [ (can you put a few of those together for me honey?) FORTRAN ] If those assembly routines were not in memory we would have to use a TSR program that has them and could use them. {IBM Technical Reference - Personal Computer Hardware Reference Lib) 6139362 ==> I am trying to put this into revolution form and say that all ==> those interrupt routines could be cloned, put into C functions ==> that would be called instead of the interupt function. Yes there are two different processor chips. Motorola and Intel. That would be a different ballgame trying to interchange programs between each of them. A different subject. Regards, -=Russ=- -=[ puft ]=- --- * Origin: The Bear's Cave Titusville FL 407-383-9372 V34/VFC/H16 (1:374/73) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 239 C LANGUAGE Ref: F3J00006 Date: 03/12/98 From: AUKE REITSMA Time: 08:38pm \/To: BOB STOUT (Read 2 times) Subj: moderators Hi Bob, On 11 Mar 98, 07:44, you wrote to Auke Reitsma >>> Trend: Darin will moderate [C++] for two years, then drop out RS>> Oh, I hope not! If it does happen, how about if *you* step in?!? ;-) >> By that time -- if other trends continue -- the C++ echo will >> have four or five messages a day. Three of which will be off >> topic, being pure C, the other one or two will be on whether >> and/or how to save the echo ... BS> Oooh, if Darin's listening, you'd best don your Nomex underoos! BS> ;-) No Nomex here. Though I have some old asbestos stuff. But for health reasons I prefer to duck ... Greetings from _____ /_|__| Auke Reitsma, Delft, The Netherlands. / | \ -------------------------------------- Quark, Quark, Quark <<== Duck sounds --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: Home by the C (Auke.Reitsma@net.hcc.nl) (2:281/400.20) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 239 C LANGUAGE Ref: F3J00007 Date: 03/13/98 From: AUKE REITSMA Time: 08:43pm \/To: DARIN MCBRIDE (Read 2 times) Subj: CRC model [9/12] Hi Darin, On 12 Mar 98, 08:03, you wrote to Bob Stout DM> This will be on-topic only insofaras I'm asking about the echo's DM> moderation. Who is supposed to tell Bob that "thank-you DM> messages" are off-topic, the moderator (Tom) or the zone's DM> co-moderator (Roger)? :-) Roger of course. But note that in my time I did most of the work as my connection generally was a lot faster than my co's. Tom has or should have his own arrangements. But in this specific case there is another rule: Knuckles are rapped in reverse proportion to the average positive contributions of the person in question. Bob's contributions therefore warrant only a slight frown on even the worst offences ;-) Greetings from _____ /_|__| Auke Reitsma, Delft, The Netherlands. / | \ -------------------------------------- --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: Home by the C (Auke.Reitsma@net.hcc.nl) (2:281/400.20) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 239 C LANGUAGE Ref: F3J00008 Date: 03/13/98 From: AUKE REITSMA Time: 09:10pm \/To: ROGER SCUDDER (Read 2 times) Subj: Avoid disaster Hi Roger, On 11 Mar 98, 22:43, you wrote to John Dumas JD>> BB Free() is just the counterpart of malloc(). JD>> I know what free does but how does it do it. RS> I'm not an expert on PC architecture, but as I understand it, RS> free and malloc are calling the operating system. It's the RS> OS who is doing all the work. free and malloc are interface RS> functions that are used to get and pass addresses. For DOS compilers malloc() and free() are usually NOT calling on the OS. Too slow, not needed in the small data models and only needed in the large data models if less than all of the available memory in allocated to the program at startup. In practice a sub-allocator scheme is used. Greetings from _____ /_|__| Auke Reitsma, Delft, The Netherlands. / | \ -------------------------------------- --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: Home by the C (Auke.Reitsma@net.hcc.nl) (2:281/400.20)