Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer
Article #87TSR's with no assembly language
From: Tiny Bubbles...
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 1990 00:24
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 1990 00:24
22 lines
1462 bytes
1462 bytes
From article <9771@wpi.wpi.edu>, by jhallen@wpi.wpi.edu (Joseph H Allen):
> In article <924@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> troj@icon.weeg.uiowa.edu () writes:
>>In <10125@portia.Stanford.EDU>, dma@nova.stanford.edu (Domingo Mihovilovic A)
>>writes:
Frankly, I'm getting sick of all the Turbo/MSC/etc. fighting. Stick it in
alt.flame or something. It's all been heard before, several times...
But I *am* intrigued by assertions that you can write TSR's with no
assembly, by both languages.
It would seem, to my untrained mind, that using any high-level language to
write a TSR would eat up amazing amounts of memory to hold the run-time
library. Even the most basic TSR requires a certain amount of run-time
kernel, on the order of a few K... doesn't it?
Also, how do you find out where your TSR "ends" (so you can feed the right
paragraph back to DOS in the TSR call)?
---
... Michael Ho, University of Nebraska
Internet: ho@hoss.unl.edu USnail: 115 Nebraska Union
Lincoln, NE 68588-0461
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<2610@unocss.unomaha.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!ssbell!mcmi!unocss!ho@fergvax.unl.eduShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!ssbell!mcmi!unocss!ho@fergvax.unl.edu From: ho@fergvax.unl.edu (Tiny Bubbles...) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer Subject: TSR's with no assembly language Message-ID: <2610@unocss.unomaha.edu> Date: 20 Mar 90 00:24:22 GMT Sender: news@unocss.unomaha.edu Reply-To: ho@hoss.unl.edu Distribution: na Lines: 22