does turbo C has be ran under windows 98/95

[developer]

and not in WINDOWS XP?
what is the reason for that?

TIA

[Alex]

I fail to see why it wouldnt work. Care to explain what error messages
you're getting?

"developer" <no*****@sina.com> wrote in message
news:cr*********@imsp212.netvigator.com...

and not in WINDOWS XP?
what is the reason for that?

TIA

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

developer <no*****@sina.com> spoke thus:

and not in WINDOWS XP? what is the reason for that?

<ot>Maybe something to do with (in)compatibility mode. XP ditched the
DOS underpinnings of 95/98.</ot>

Read these links.

http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt
http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc/off-topic.html

--
Christopher Benson-Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
ataru(at)cyberspace.org | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.

[GMM50]

developer wrote:

and not in WINDOWS XP?
what is the reason for that?

TIA

In Win95 and Win98 you wern't supposed to be able to directly access
the hardware. So inport() and outport() and all the other language
extensions that directly accessed the hardware should not have worked.
But they did 'most' of the time.

With Win XP Microsoft put in place better isolation between the user
and the hardware. I suspect Borland and others freshened up all the
hardware interface functions to match the OS.

I can run Turbo C++ 3.0 is a DOS window. I can't use the long file
names and other subtle problems kept poping up.
I switched to Borland BuilderX. Works great in XP Pro and XP Home

gm