[nos-bbs] jnos for dos

Barry Siegfried k2mf at k2mf.ampr.org
Thu Apr 19 02:55:29 EDT 2007

[Glenn Thomas <glennt at charter.net> wrote]:

> I understand that Borland 3.1 is somewhat buggy, though it was used
> as the baseline for JNOS 11.X.

Borland 3.1 does have a few bugs which affected xNOS, but the reason
it was chosen as the baseline is because it offered a significant
improvement over 3.0.

The two most important bugs that were in 3.1 were:

1) the stat() bug that caused DESQview and OS/2 to crash - fixed
   by creating getsize(FilePointer) and fsize(filename) which
   calls it (probably created by N1BEE), and,

2) the 32-bit shifting bug - fixed by the NETSTAT(bits) macro
   created by N5LYT.

Two other less important bugs in 3.1 reported by N1BEE when using
the "-3" compiler switch were:

1) the "huge" keyword might not work correctly (although I personally
   have never found this to be a problem in my own source code), and,

2) the 'C' ternary operator ("?:") might have some peculiar behavior
   in figuring out true or false if you are not careful to isolate
   the expressions that are being questioned with parentheses.

> I have to ask, are you building via the Borland IDE or are you using
> the makefile and command line compiler?  I tried to compile with the
> Borland 4.0 and 4.5 IDE's and got loads of errors, mainly due to
> strong typing errors a'la C++.  There's nothing really wrong with
> weak typing a'la C, except that it easier to make a mistake.

Please forgive the stupid question Glenn, but what are "strong" and
"weak" typing in C++ and C, respectively?  I have never heard these
terms and would like to know what they mean.  Obviously, I'm a 'C'
(and not a C++) guy.

> Using the makefile and either the 4.0 or 4.5 command line compiler
> I was able to compile JNOS 1.11c and f with no problems.  FWIW, I've
> also successfully compiled JNOS 1.11X with Borland 1.5 and 2.0, but
> there are a few gotchas there...

Do you recall what those gotchas were?  I've never used anything
other than Borland 3.1 so I am not familiar with the earlier Borland
or Turbo-C compilers.  They were before my time.  :)

> One other thing about Borland, I think that 3.1 was the last release
> that included an assembler.  After that it was an option, so be sure
> to save the object files from assembly language modules.

I believe you're right about that, which I guess means it is too bad
for people who would need to change any assembly code in these modules.

73, de Barry, K2MF >>
          <|>      Barry Siegfried
| Internet | bgs at mfnos.net              |
| HomePage | http://www.mfnos.net/~bgs  |
| Amprnet  | k2mf at k2mf.ampr.org         |
| PBBS     | k2mf at k2ge.#cnj.nj.usa.noam |

More information about the nos-bbs mailing list