[GEM Development] [GEM-DEV] GEM 32

[Shane Gough]

>
> Thunking the other way, like win95?
>
>
I think Win 3.x with Win32s thunked 32 bit calls to 16 bit calls and on
Win95 it thunked 16 bit calls to 32 bit calls. It depended on the underlying
implementation - 16 bit or 32 bit. Either way - complexity. I think this is
why OS/X was more stable than Win32 (95, XP, NT and the like). OS/X provided
a complete emulator for pre-OS/X applications (On x86 platforms there was a
PowerPC emulator for OS/X apps).

I have a GCC 3.3.3 crosscompiler that produces TOS binaries.  Meant for
> MiNT, but I've run the binaries on Emutos.
>
>
I think support for GCC 3.4 would be preferable but if it is compatible with
with GCC 3.2 or greater you have an implementation of almost all of the C99
and C++ 2.0 standards. I'll have to check docs to confirm that though. As I
said I don't have a lot of experience with GEM/TOS on Atari. It would be the
better version to port though (already flat memory model and 32 bit aware on
the 68K based hardware). The Atari versions of AES and the desktop (or their
open source replacements) would be a lot easier to convert to a 32 bit flat
memory model PC based system. The source for PC based GEM I've looked at has
a *lot* of assembly in it - is that the case for Atari GEM?


> -uso.
> _______________________________________________
> gem-dev mailing list
> gem-dev at simpits.org
> http://www.simpits.org/mailman/listinfo/gem-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.simpits.org/pipermail/gem-dev/attachments/20091109/05dce487/attachment.html