Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #168503 > unrolled thread

Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?)

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) KP2 KP2 <jungletrain@outlook.com> - 2022-12-10 13:06 -0800
    Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-12-10 20:57 -0600
      Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-12-10 22:57 -0600
      Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2022-12-11 20:31 +0000
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Robert Latest <boblatest@yahoo.com> - 2022-12-12 14:39 +0000
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2022-12-13 12:15 +0000
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-12-13 16:23 +0000
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-26 05:20 -0800
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-12-26 14:37 +0000
            Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-26 10:30 -0800
              Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-12-27 16:45 +0000
                Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-27 19:38 -0800
                  Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-12-29 02:09 +0000
                    Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2022-12-29 19:56 -0800
    Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2022-12-11 20:12 +0000
      Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-12-12 14:33 -0600
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-12 21:12 +0000
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-12 16:09 -0800
    Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Jack Lemmon <invalid@invalid.net> - 2022-12-12 20:30 +0000
      Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2022-12-12 15:20 -0600
      Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2022-12-12 21:28 +0000
        Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-12 22:39 +0000
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2022-12-12 22:49 +0000
            Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) "minf...@arcor.de" <minforth@arcor.de> - 2022-12-31 04:01 -0800
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2022-12-12 15:56 -0800
            Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-12-13 14:55 +0000
              Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-13 16:26 +0100
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-13 14:50 +0100
          Re: Limitation of MS-DOS C compiler? (was Re: Should I convert FORTRAN code to C?) Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2022-12-13 18:56 +0300

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#168516

On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:30:00 +0000, Jack Lemmon wrote:

> On 10/12/2022 21:06, KP2 KP2 wrote:
>> On Sunday, July 17, 1988 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-7, Daniel R. Levy wrote:
>>> In article <880712162...@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>, 
fl...@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) writes:
>>>> [a certain MS-DOS C compiler can't compile an array larger than a 
segment]
>>>> MS-DOS C compilers seem only to accept a subset
>>>> of the C language because it allows them to compile certain 
benchmarks
>>>> into faster code.
[snip]
>> How is it today?
> 
> We are in year 2022 and nobody is using MSDOS on this planet.

MSDOS, while almost extinct, is still in use.

> Are you still using it? Where do you get machines that can run msdos?

It can run in a virtual machine. In 2018, Microsoft even released the
source code for MSDOS 1.25 and 2.0; the source is on GitHub.

Also, MSDOS work-alike operating systems (and 8086 virtual machines) are
readily available and legal. See FreeDOS, DOSEmu, DosBox and the like.

-- 
Lew Pitcher
"In Skills, We Trust"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#168517

Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> writes:
>On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:30:00 +0000, Jack Lemmon wrote:
>
>> On 10/12/2022 21:06, KP2 KP2 wrote:
>>> On Sunday, July 17, 1988 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-7, Daniel R. Levy wrote:
>>>> In article <880712162...@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>, 
>fl...@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) writes:
>>>>> [a certain MS-DOS C compiler can't compile an array larger than a 
>segment]
>>>>> MS-DOS C compilers seem only to accept a subset
>>>>> of the C language because it allows them to compile certain 
>benchmarks
>>>>> into faster code.
>[snip]
>>> How is it today?
>> 
>> We are in year 2022 and nobody is using MSDOS on this planet.
>
>MSDOS, while almost extinct, is still in use.

Used as a hobby or historical oddity.   Is anyone using it for anything
productive?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#168518

On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 22:39:32 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> writes:
>>On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:30:00 +0000, Jack Lemmon wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/12/2022 21:06, KP2 KP2 wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, July 17, 1988 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-7, Daniel R. Levy wrote:
>>>>> In article <880712162...@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>,
>>fl...@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) writes:
>>>>>> [a certain MS-DOS C compiler can't compile an array larger than a
>>segment]
>>>>>> MS-DOS C compilers seem only to accept a subset of the C language
>>>>>> because it allows them to compile certain
>>benchmarks
>>>>>> into faster code.
>>[snip]
>>>> How is it today?
>>> 
>>> We are in year 2022 and nobody is using MSDOS on this planet.
>>
>>MSDOS, while almost extinct, is still in use.
> 
> Used as a hobby or historical oddity.   Is anyone using it for anything
> productive?

AIUI, some embedded systems use MSDOS (or one of it's open source cousins
like FreeDOS). Microsoft even sells a version of MSDOS strictly for use
in embedded systems. Perhaps your microwave oven or wireless telephone
handset runs MSDOS under the covers.



-- 
Lew Pitcher
"In Skills, We Trust"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#168698

Lew Pitcher schrieb am Montag, 12. Dezember 2022 um 23:50:02 UTC+1:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 22:39:32 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote: 
> 
> > Lew Pitcher <lew.p...@digitalfreehold.ca> writes: 
> >>On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:30:00 +0000, Jack Lemmon wrote: 
> >> 
> >>> On 10/12/2022 21:06, KP2 KP2 wrote: 
> >>>> On Sunday, July 17, 1988 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-7, Daniel R. Levy wrote: 
> >>>>> In article <880712162...@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>, 
> >>fl...@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) writes: 
> >>>>>> [a certain MS-DOS C compiler can't compile an array larger than a 
> >>segment] 
> >>>>>> MS-DOS C compilers seem only to accept a subset of the C language 
> >>>>>> because it allows them to compile certain 
> >>benchmarks 
> >>>>>> into faster code. 
> >>[snip] 
> >>>> How is it today? 
> >>> 
> >>> We are in year 2022 and nobody is using MSDOS on this planet. 
> >> 
> >>MSDOS, while almost extinct, is still in use. 
> > 
> > Used as a hobby or historical oddity. Is anyone using it for anything 
> > productive?
> AIUI, some embedded systems use MSDOS (or one of it's open source cousins 
> like FreeDOS). Microsoft even sells a version of MSDOS strictly for use 
> in embedded systems. Perhaps your microwave oven or wireless telephone 
> handset runs MSDOS under the covers.
> -- 

FlexOS -  a realtime DOS - is still alive in its niche.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#168519

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
> Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> writes:
>>On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:30:00 +0000, Jack Lemmon wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/12/2022 21:06, KP2 KP2 wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, July 17, 1988 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-7, Daniel R. Levy wrote:
>>>>> In article <880712162...@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>, 
>>fl...@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) writes:
>>>>>> [a certain MS-DOS C compiler can't compile an array larger than a 
>>segment]
>>>>>> MS-DOS C compilers seem only to accept a subset
>>>>>> of the C language because it allows them to compile certain 
>>benchmarks
>>>>>> into faster code.
>>[snip]
>>>> How is it today?
>>> 
>>> We are in year 2022 and nobody is using MSDOS on this planet.
>>
>>MSDOS, while almost extinct, is still in use.
>
> Used as a hobby or historical oddity.   Is anyone using it for anything
> productive?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-DOS#End-of-life

    MS-DOS 6.22 was the last standalone version produced by Microsoft
    for Intel 8088, Intel 8086, and Intel 80286 processors, which
    remain available for download via their MSDN, volume license,
    and OEM license partner websites, for customers with valid login
    credentials. MS-DOS is still used in embedded x86 systems due
    to its simple architecture and minimal memory and processor
    requirements, though some current products have switched to
    the still-maintained open-source alternative FreeDOS.

The article doesn't give any examples.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#168530

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>> Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> writes:
>>>On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:30:00 +0000, Jack Lemmon wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/12/2022 21:06, KP2 KP2 wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, July 17, 1988 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-7, Daniel R. Levy wrote:
>>>>>> In article <880712162...@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>, 
>>>fl...@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) writes:
>>>>>>> [a certain MS-DOS C compiler can't compile an array larger than a 
>>>segment]
>>>>>>> MS-DOS C compilers seem only to accept a subset
>>>>>>> of the C language because it allows them to compile certain 
>>>benchmarks
>>>>>>> into faster code.
>>>[snip]
>>>>> How is it today?
>>>> 
>>>> We are in year 2022 and nobody is using MSDOS on this planet.
>>>
>>>MSDOS, while almost extinct, is still in use.
>>
>> Used as a hobby or historical oddity.   Is anyone using it for anything
>> productive?
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-DOS#End-of-life
>
>    MS-DOS 6.22 was the last standalone version produced by Microsoft
>    for Intel 8088, Intel 8086, and Intel 80286 processors, which
>    remain available for download via their MSDN, volume license,
>    and OEM license partner websites, for customers with valid login
>    credentials. MS-DOS is still used in embedded x86 systems due
>    to its simple architecture and minimal memory and processor
>    requirements, though some current products have switched to
>    the still-maintained open-source alternative FreeDOS.
>
>The article doesn't give any examples.

Yeah, I think it is highly unlikely that there is any significant
number of embedded products using either MSDOS or FreeDOS, certainly
all the embedded processors we build run wind river, QNX or linux, and
have for decades.   Granted, they're neither x86 nor underpowered, but
rather MIPS and now ARMv8 ranging from four to 96 cores.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#168531

On 13/12/2022 15:55, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>> Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> writes:
>>>> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:30:00 +0000, Jack Lemmon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/12/2022 21:06, KP2 KP2 wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, July 17, 1988 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-7, Daniel R. Levy wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <880712162...@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>,
>>>> fl...@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) writes:
>>>>>>>> [a certain MS-DOS C compiler can't compile an array larger than a
>>>> segment]
>>>>>>>> MS-DOS C compilers seem only to accept a subset
>>>>>>>> of the C language because it allows them to compile certain
>>>> benchmarks
>>>>>>>> into faster code.
>>>> [snip]
>>>>>> How is it today?
>>>>>
>>>>> We are in year 2022 and nobody is using MSDOS on this planet.
>>>>
>>>> MSDOS, while almost extinct, is still in use.
>>>
>>> Used as a hobby or historical oddity.   Is anyone using it for anything
>>> productive?
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-DOS#End-of-life
>>
>>     MS-DOS 6.22 was the last standalone version produced by Microsoft
>>     for Intel 8088, Intel 8086, and Intel 80286 processors, which
>>     remain available for download via their MSDN, volume license,
>>     and OEM license partner websites, for customers with valid login
>>     credentials. MS-DOS is still used in embedded x86 systems due
>>     to its simple architecture and minimal memory and processor
>>     requirements, though some current products have switched to
>>     the still-maintained open-source alternative FreeDOS.
>>
>> The article doesn't give any examples.
> 
> Yeah, I think it is highly unlikely that there is any significant
> number of embedded products using either MSDOS or FreeDOS, certainly
> all the embedded processors we build run wind river, QNX or linux, and
> have for decades.   Granted, they're neither x86 nor underpowered, but
> rather MIPS and now ARMv8 ranging from four to 96 cores.

For embedded x86 boards, MSDOS (and then FreeDOS) probably outnumbered 
the combined numbers of Wind River and QNX by a factor of 100 or more. 
The various half-arsed versions of embedded Windows also enjoyed a 
certain popularity.  (Wind River and QNX were both good systems, and 
like other commercial RTOS's they have their uses.)

The only reason people ever used x86 embedded systems was that they were 
the same as their non-embedded x86 development machines.  That meant, 
for almost everyone, MSDOS and then Windows.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#168527

On 12/12/2022 23:39, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> writes:
>> On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:30:00 +0000, Jack Lemmon wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/12/2022 21:06, KP2 KP2 wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, July 17, 1988 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-7, Daniel R. Levy wrote:
>>>>> In article <880712162...@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>,
>> fl...@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) writes:
>>>>>> [a certain MS-DOS C compiler can't compile an array larger than a
>> segment]
>>>>>> MS-DOS C compilers seem only to accept a subset
>>>>>> of the C language because it allows them to compile certain
>> benchmarks
>>>>>> into faster code.
>> [snip]
>>>> How is it today?
>>>
>>> We are in year 2022 and nobody is using MSDOS on this planet.
>>
>> MSDOS, while almost extinct, is still in use.
> 
> Used as a hobby or historical oddity.   Is anyone using it for anything
> productive?

It survived surprisingly long in embedded systems.  Until embedded Linux 
took over, DOS was used on embedded x86 cards long after Windows had 
hidden it in the PC world.

The Intel 8086 was produced until 1998, the 80186 until 2007.  The most 
recent FreeDOS release was earlier this year.

The last time I made a bootable floppy for a customer, with FreeDOS and 
the Turbo Pascal software for controlling some electronics we made 
decades ago, was probably around 10 years ago.  But I heard of people 
still using the system was a lot more recently.  It was probably around 
a decade ago that the last DOS-based PC used by our production/test 
department stopped working.  We still have a Windows 3.1 machine with 
specialised hardware, and it will cost a great deal of money when that 
must be replaced.

I doubt if there has been anything /new/ made with DOS for a long time, 
but so much has been made using it that there is still plenty around in 
the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" category.

(The prime use of FreeDOS and DOSBox is, of course, old games.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#168533

Scott Lurndal to Lew Pitcher:

> > MSDOS, while almost extinct, is still in use.
>
> Used as a hobby or historical oddity.   Is anyone using it
> for anything productive?

Several people I know run their FidoNet nodes on MS-DOS.

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web