🚀 go-pugleaf

In comp.os.msdos.programmer, timlee@public.btr.com writes:
>Some MSDOS C compilers are limited to 640K, use messy segmented
>pointers ("void far *foo" and things like that), and have only
>16 bit ints, which are bound to annoy many UNIX C programmers.
>Others, using MSDOS extenders, avoid the 640K limit and segmented
>pointers, and have 32 bit ints.

>16 bit compilers:
>Borland C/C++

I'm running from a very limited knowledge base, but...

From my brief perusal of Borland C++ 3.0 manuals, it appeared to me that
while they DO have such cruft as near/far/huge/etc, they weren't limited
to 16-bit ints.  Or was that "long"s that were 32 bits?  Hmmm.

Are you saying that the "32-bit" compilers you list do NOT have to deal
with the near/far/huge stuff?  Do they do this by always generating the
worst-case "far" code?  From my (admittedly limited) understanding of
the DOS world, the braindead segmented Intel architecture forces you to
either pay attention to segmentation, or accept fairly serious efficiency
losses.  Or am I misunderstanding you?

Maybe I need a clearer understanding of what an "MSDOS extender" is...

Gary