<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 7:39 PM, Hin-Tak Leung <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk">hintak_leung@yahoo.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>
I wonder how bad is it to port some old version of djgpp forward?<br>
( <a href="http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/history.html" target="_blank">http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/history.html</a> ) - it is a fork of gcc as far as I see and did support 16-bit code generation at one time?<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br><div>It is a fork of GCC, but as stated earlier, it produces only 32-bit code. Still, it isn't impossible to make a 32-bit compiler generate 16-bit code, is it? I know Visual C++ (1.52) was like that, and while it would definitely not be trivial, perhaps adding in Win16 support to MinGW/DJGPPv2 GCC would be a better way to go rather than porting an old version of DJGPP. Nobody really wants to maintain an old version of GCC and from what I'm seeing, DJGPP v1 uses a pretty old version of GCC (2.x I believe). DJGPP v2's latest version uses GCC 4.3.2, so it might be possible to work with that and add 16-bit DOS/Win16 code generation.</div>