🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <DEVEN.89Mar30052014@daniel.pawl.rpi.edu> shadow@pawl.rpi.edu (Deven T. Corzine) writes:
>That is another option.  Will #pragma's override older duplicate (but
>different) declarations?  [also, is there any other valid type than
>"libcall" and "syscall"?]

	I think not.  Doesn't matter, since they all use SysBase,
which is set up in the c.a startup code.  All you need to do is put
your exec.amigix.library pointer in SysBase instead of the contents
of AbsExecBase.

>>        Page 1-64, White 1.1 RKMs: Partial blocks may be deallocated,
>>but note again that FreeMem() rounds your address down to the nearest
>>even multiple of MEM_BLOCKSIZE and the size up to the nearest multiple
>>before the FreeMem() request is performed.
>
>Ah...  there's the discrepency.  You have a different manual than I.

	The comments should still be there.

>Anyway, you can deallocate partial blocks...  fine.  Is there any
>place you can look up the MEM_BLOCKSIZE at run-time, or must you
>recompile when the granularity changes?  [recompiling would be a
>nuisance.]

	Recompile.  Better yet, don't _depend_ on a given granularity.

>Any place I can get the 1.3 Autodocs?  I don't have the money right
>now to buy the developer's disk yet, or the 1.3 Includes & Autodocs
>RKM... 

	They cost $20 from CATS.

>I don't suppose it might be possible [or legal?] for you [or someone]
>to email me [aCk] the V1.3 Autodocs, might it? 

	Not legal (they're copyrighted).  Sorry.

>Presumably the question of message vs. reply port would be if you had
>to use a different port to receive the reply to a message you sent to
>some other port from a port you could receive (via PutMsg()) a message
>on.  Hence, not the same message -- one with the port as destination,
>another with it as reply port.  No need to separate them, is there?

	Mind restating that in english?

-- 
Randell Jesup, Commodore Engineering {uunet|rutgers|allegra}!cbmvax!jesup