HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wdrdjh@thor.cf.ac.uk (Dr D J Harvey 92)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: C++ heap extender advice wanted
Date: 10 Nov 92 12:17:52 GMT
Organization: University of Wales College of Cardiff, Cardiff, Wales, UK
X-Mailer: Cardiff Computing Maths PP Mail Open News Gateway

I need to use large number of linked list elements in my C++ program,
and am running out of conventional memory (code size is quite small, I'm
only worried about data).

Having lots of XMS, I need a fairly transparent way of using this -
perhaps as a commercial product with a set of C++ base classes, from
which my objects can inherit the necessary features such as overloaded
"new" etc.

Advice from anyone who has used, or knows of such systems, whether PD,
shareware or commercial would be much appreciated, pref by E-mail.  If I
get enough interesting info, I'll post a summary.

Dave Harvey
harveydj@cardiff.ac.uk
+44 222 552588
Dept Radiology
University Hospital of Wales
Heath Park
Cardiff CF4 4XW
UK
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (George Jetson)
Subject: Environment size hack in DOS 5?
Summary: Don't tell me about SHELL= in CONFIG.SYS!
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:45:02 GMT

In versions of DOS prior to 4.0, there was a well known patch location
in COMMAND.COM that allowed you to change the default environment size.
The default was usually something like 160 bytes (0A paragraphs), which
is ridculously low.  However, it was a simple matter to use DEBUG to
patch it to something reasonable (e.g., setting the byte to 30 would get
you a 768 char [minimum] environment, in all your subshells.)

The ability to do this is absolutely curitical to my use of DOS, and it
is one of the main reasons I stick with a version of DOS 3.x.  However,
I a friend of mine insists on using DOS 5, and she is having environment
size problems (I.e., programs which are run under Windoze or other menu
programs get small environments)

I have spent fruitless hours perusing the DOS 5 COMMAND.COM, and have
not been able to solve this problem.  (I did it originally on a version
of DOS 3.3, long ago, in a couple of hours, so I know it should not be
that hard).  I have also spent time on DR DOS 6.0, with the same dismal
results.  I have also perused the usual gang of archive sites, and have
not found anything.  So, my question to the net is, "Does anyone know
the magic patch locations for DOS 5.0?"

BTW, patching COMMAND.COM *is* the only correct solution.  CONFIG.SYS
only affects the first loaded copy of COMMAND.COM.  Further, there are
various kludge solutions floating around, e.g., ENV.ARC (from 1988 [!]) in
MSDOS.SYSUTL on Simtel, et al, but I am not interested in kludge solutions.

Anyone know the magic formula?

************************************************************************
I've been told to back off on the diode jokes, but I still don't
like smileys ;-)

	- pynq@quads.uchicago.edu, who is still costing the net
	  hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars, every time he posts -
************************************************************************
From: Jeff.Tomich@f380.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Jeff Tomich)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: FOPEN command
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 92 13:49:12 PDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/380

Hello BL0528540-Bill!

03 Nov 92, BL0528540-Bill Oswald  ALC2817 writes to All:


 BOA>         stream=fopen("c:\foo\afile", "r")

 BOA> The resulting executable works if afile is in the same directory
 BOA> as the executable. If the above is correct the fopen command
 BOA> should be able to find afile independant of where the executable
 BOA> lives. But that does not seem to be the case. What am I doing wrong?
 BOA> BTW, I am using borland c++ 3.1

I assume *stream has been set as a pointer to point to FILE. Understanding that it is, copy the dir+filename into a variable and plug it in. Like,

char fname[80];
str(fname,"c:\foo\afile");
stream=fopen(fname, "r");


Jeff

--  
Internet: Jeff.Tomich@f380.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG
UUCP:     ...!myrddin!tct!mechanic!380!Jeff.Tomich
Note: Mechanic is a free gateway between USENET & FIdonet.
      For information write to chief@mechanic.fidonet.org

Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Mike Levis) (OS/2)
Subject: Re: 386 Assembler Question - Easy one...
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 10:09:06 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.145342.17642@merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com> keithp@merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com (Keith L. Petry) writes:
>
>How about :
>
>    mov bl, VALUE
>    mov al, bl
>    mov ah, bl
>    shl eax, ax
              ^^ (I think you mean 16)
>    mov al, bl
>    mov ah, bl

Your code is very efficient.  It squeezes the time to execute.  Let me
squeeze it some more.  It destroys a 16-bit reg instead of an 8-bit, though.

How's this:
			; 386 486 clock cycles
    mov  al,  VALUE	;  4   1
    mov  ah,  al	;  2   1
    mov  dx,  ax	;  2   1
    shl  eax, 16	;  3   2
    mov  ax,  dx	;  2   1
			; 13   6 total clock cycles

It only saves 2 clock cycles (and a few bytes) but optimizing
assembler can be fun sometimes.  :)

-- 
====== Mike Levis   mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu ======
"I believed what I was told, I thought it was a good   .--.
life, I thought I was happy.  Then I found something  (OS/2)
that changed it all..."  --  Anonymous, 2112  [Rush]   ~--~
From: mcsbc2gw@dct.ac.uk
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: PROBLEMS, PROBLEMS, PROBLEMS!!!(ARRGGGHHH!)
Date: 5 Nov 92 12:01:56 GMT
Organization: Dundee Institute of Technology


	Hi Buds,

	Listen, can anybody help me with this particular DOS problem

	I have just set-up my 486-33 MHz and have problems in that

	sometimes when I boot DOS reports Fixed Disk Failure and 

	pressing reset does absolutely nowt. I have to switch it off at the

	mains and switch back-on. 

	Also, Norton Utilities reports that my S-VGA card is a VGA

	and Checkit reports errors with the Video Memory (16).

	Is my system at fault or is it a DOS problem ?

	Reasons for the above status would be appreciated as soon as poss.

	Hard Disk Man

	MCSBC2GW (@ D.I.T)
From: andrew@giraffe.ru.ac.za (Andrew Murdoch)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Microsoft C and fonts
Summary: Microsoft C and fonts
Keywords: Fonts
Date: 12 Nov 92 14:58:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: giraffe.andrew.4.721580282
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa

I am using Microsoft Quick C, version 2.5, which has its own font files
(*.fon) for use with its own font functions.  Does the format of these font 
files conform to any standard?  How can I create my own, and how can I use 
the existing files with my own functions?
Any input would be most appreciated.
--
     |\/|     v |       ANDREW MURDOCH   -   Institute for Water Research
 /_\ |  | \___@ |  Rhodes University, Box 94, Grahamstown, 6140, South Africa
/   \     /   \ | Internet: andrew@iwr.ru.ac.za     Phone: [xx27] [0]461 24014
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: vpham@cs.ulowell.edu (Vinh)
Subject: Re: way to power off my PC.
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 22:15:28 GMT

yes
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer,rec.games.programmer,comp.sys.ibm.pc
From: tlhouse@nyx.cs.du.edu (fiver)
Subject: Re: Looking for SB programming info
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 14:11:50 GMT


>>  Can anyone point me to sample ASM/C source code (or better yet, 
>> a C function library) which will allow me to play digitized sound 
>> samples through a Soundblaster card?  
>>
>>   I got a copy of the SBF library and have had a lot of difficulty 
>> with it (could just be my system)
>>
>>
> I found a whole load of stuff on the SIMTEL archive in MSDOS.SOUND 
> called SBF.ZIP.  It's a C library of FM and wave drivers.  It looks 
> pretty comprehensive, though I haven't had time to play with it yet.
 
 
He already has the SBF .. he said it gave him problems .. I dunno, I don't
want to use anything that requires other drivers to be loaded (such as
SOUND.COM or SBFM.COM), so any of the programming I do gets away from that
. there really isn't too much good stuff out there, to tell the truth ..

Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: abutler@ariel.demon.co.uk (Tony Butler)
Subject: BC/C++ -> ANSI C 
Distribution: world
Organization: Megadodo, Inc.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 19:03:24 +0000


In article <1992Nov11.114205.2259@cnsvax.uwec.edu> princemr@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:

> 
> Ok, here's my problem...
> 
> I recently purchased Borland C/C++ and that is all fun and great. My problem
> lies in the fact the many of my classes and on our campuses UNIX machine and
> that runs ANSI C. 
> 
> I was wondering if there was any way to get BC/C++ to "think" (bad term, I
> know) in ANSI C.
> 

If you use the IDE environment, choose: Options, Compiler, Source  and
you can choose between Borland, ANSI, UNIX V and K & R type source code.
I dunno about the command line version, but I'm sure if you RTFM it will
be in there somewhere, or possible it's one of the things displayed when
you just do a 'BCC' from the DOS prompt.
 

      ---  _   _
       |  (_) ( ) (_|.
      --------------|-
                   -


     +---+        Internet: abutler@ariel.demon.co.uk         +---+
    /   /|                                                    |\   \
   +---+ |        Fido net: Anthony Butler @ 2:250/408        | +---+
   |   | +                                                    + |   |
   |   |/      CompuServe : 100041,2055                        \|   |
   +---+                                                        +---+

Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.programmer:10452 rec.games.programmer:4585 comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard:3604
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer,rec.games.programmer,comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard
From: ematias@csri.toronto.edu (Ummm... me!)
Subject: Looking for SB programming info
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Date: 10 Nov 92 06:24:07 GMT


Hello folks,

   Can anyone point me to sample ASM/C source code (or better yet, a C
function library) which will allow me to play digitized sound samples
through a Soundblaster card?  I am writing a VGA arcade-action game on my
MSDOS system, and would like to add more than just the silly bleeps that the
PC is (in)famous for.
   I got a copy of the SBF library and have had a lot of difficulty with it
(could just be the fault of my system), so right now I'm looking for
alternate sources.

   Any help would be GREATLY appreciated.  Please e-mail me (preferably), or
post for the world to see if you deem it to be net-worthy.  If I get a lot
of responses, I'll post a summary.


   Thanks,

     - Mark Rosteck -
(ematias@csri.toronto.edu)
(g1marker@cdf.toronto.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: cl27111@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Christopher  Lindsey)
Subject: Re: Checking for disk in drive ????
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:58:37 GMT

john@fl_gator.b17a.ingr.com (John Eason) writes:

>Hello,

>    Does anyone know how to check to see if a disk is in the floppy drive from code??? I am tired of seeing 'Abort/Retry/Fail' when there's not. Any help would be useful and appreciated.

>Thanks.

	What you can try using is the BIOS disk services beforehand to check
and see if there is a disk in the drive.  INT 13,4 will do this for you, and
return a value greater than zero in register AH if an error took place.
At least this way you don't get the Abort/Retry/Fail message.  Hope this helps!

Christopher Lindsey -- Dept. of Landscape Architecture, Univ. of Illinois
From: davet@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Dave Tutelman)
Subject: Re: COMPILING SPEED
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs - Lincroft, NJ
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 12:55:14 GMT
Summary: Pascal was slow, but C was slower

In article <1992Nov10.160940.5958@exu.ericsson.se> exuhag@exu.ericsson.se writes:
>Dan Odom writes:
>>Yes, it is.  Go write a compiler for Pascal.  Then write a compiler for
>>C++.  You'll see.
>
>But until Turbo came along, MS-DOS Pascal compilers were total
>dogs.

Well, sort of.  The competitors to Turbo in 1983 were compiled Pascals by
Microsoft and IBM (the same product, I thought), and an interpreted Pascal
by (if memory serves) P-systems.  The ads in Byte for Turbo (I still have a
copy somewhere) stressed that it:
 - Compiled much faster than IBM/Microsoft.
 - Ran much faster than P-systems.
 - Ran in less RAM / disk than either.
 - Was MUCH cheaper than either.

One of those "too good to be true" ads, but I figured for $49 I could take a
chance, and it WAS true.  (Still have Turbo Pascal 1.0 floppy, Ser #1027.)
Besides, I was talked into it by their EXCELLENT, free tech support.
(Apropos another discussion in this newsgroup.)

ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE ......
Did you ever try a C compiler of the same era?  MUCH SLOWER than even IBM
Pascal in compiling. Much worse.
The biggest speed problem with IBM Pascal was not just compute speed,
but juggling the 3-4 floppies you needed for
a floppy-only machine -- which was most PCs back then.  Most of Turbo's
speed advantage came from doing the whole job in RAM.

The C compilers of the day also required floppy-juggling.  But you COULD
take a coffee break between handling floppies.

>What's troubling here is that people are blindly accepting
>the "fact" that C++ compilers _have_ to be slow.

Borland C++ runs REAL fast on my home machine; I have no complaints at all
about speed.  But that's because they haven't forgotten their roots. They
use as much extended memory as they can eat, and I've found that compile
speed is very sensitive to RAM (both extended and lower) available to
BC++.  They're STILL doing it by keeping as much as possible in core.
Evidence:
 - A home machine memory upgrade gave a manifold increase in compile speed.
   I went from 1Meg to 4Meg, giving almost a 10X speed gain.
 - My office machine, with even more extended memory but with less available
   space in the lower 640K, compiles fast enough for a while (about 1200
   lines at a clip), but then stops and waits for a while... an annoying
   while.  On a few occasions, such hiccups end with an "out of memory"
   fatal error.  I'll unload a TSR or two, and recompile successfully,
   and much faster.

Dave
---
Not associated with Borland, but a usually-satisfied customer.
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: pfk@rz.uni-jena.de (Frank Klemm)
Subject: Re: Anti-Piracy by Serial Number ?
Reply-To: pfk@rz.uni-jena.de (Frank Klemm)
Organization: University Jena, Germany
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 14:36:30 GMT


In article <1992Nov3.163821.3971@msdhsv.ingr.com>, john@fl_gator.b17a.ingr.com (John Eason) writes:
|> Hello,
|> 
|>   I noticed with DOS 5.0 that each floopy and hard disk has a unique
|>   serial number. I would like to access this serial number from code.
|>   If my code could check the number against a known serial number
|>   I could detect whether the user has copied my code to another disk.
|>   I am trying to hinder the piracy of my software as you might have
|>   guessed. If anyone has any info it would be greatly appreciated.
|> 
|>   Email is prefered. Thanks.
|> 
|> -- 
The serial number stands as a 32 bit number in the boot sector. It is
interpreted as a hexadecimal number. All programs except microsofts diskcopy
copy this number direct to the destination disk. Microsofts diskcopy modifies
these 4 bytes. You can also use any disk editor to change the serial number.
Norton Disk Editor displays these 4 bytes as "Serial number" so there is no problem
to change it.

Frank

Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: smuegge@netcom.com (Shad Muegge)
Subject: HIMEM.SYS re-entrant?
Keywords: HIMEM
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:26:06 GMT

	A friend of mine is writing a real time OS under DOS and wants to 
know if HIMEM.SYS is re-entrant.  Please reply by email, and I will
pass the information along to him.

Thanks,
Shad
smuegge@netcom.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: vpham@cs.ulowell.edu (Vinh)
Subject: how do you read macintosh disks
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:10:03 GMT

on dos? thanks for any replies by email.
From: frampton@skitzo.dseg.ti.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: 'new'ing >64K Objects in BC++
Date: 12 Nov 92 07:42:04 CDT
Followup-To: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Organization: Texas Instruments Component Test Facility

> compiler extensions.  Btw, PharLap sells a DOS Extender that works
> with BC++ or MSC.  I believe that a 16-bit Extender allows you to
> access all your machine's memory (up to 16MB), but size_t and int are
> still 16-bits, so each object is limited to 64K.  A 32-bit Extender
> (like the one in DJGPP) makes them 32-bits so there are no 64K limits.

  My current work group is looking into buying me an extender for analysis
  apps programs as the data is getting monsterous now.  I might then add
  that PharLap is our best choice since our work stations are mixed (2/3)86s.
  However it is rumored that BC++ 4.0 will have its own extender built in.
  The 3.1 upgrade is also said to have PharLap Lite (up to 2 meg only).

> 
> Currently I just don't use single arrays larger than 64K.  I do most
> of my programming under MS Windows (which is why I don't use DJGPP),
> so at least I have access to all my machines memory (Windows functions
> as a 16-bit DOS Extender).  A 16-bit Extender requires a 286 or
> better; a 32-bit extender requires a 386 or better.  Let me know if
> I'm wrong about any of this.

  In wonderment...  Should it not be an option to force 16-bit addressing
  out of a 32 bit extender?

Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: What is MicroSoft's usenet address?
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:30:45 GMT

In <1992Nov11.070334.26234@microsoft.com> jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer) writes:

>BTW: Yes, I was on the MS-DOS 900 line ($2/min or $20/call); no
>it is NOT programming support; NO the $ microsoft gets from that
>doesn't begin to cover the cost of offering it (after AT&T and
>federal, state and local taxes are taken out, microsoft gets about
>$1/minute).

$60/hr isn't enough to cover the cost of having a guy answer the
phone?  Lemme see now, that's around $10,800 a month.  Hell, if MS
wants to pick up the cost of putting in the phones and stuff, I'd work
for $11k/month.

Or perhaps you mean that given what it costs, they don't recover
enough to make up for the ill will created by having this kind of
support?  Now THAT one I could believe.

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: mtl92205@dit.upm.es (Pablo Varela)
Subject: Re: HELP - Can't access SVGA from within C
Organization: UUES, Asociacion de Usuarios de UNIX, Spain
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:28:36 GMT

	Hi!
	About your problem with the 320*200*256 video mode, there is a very
easy way to handle that.
	- First you set the video mode using the vidoe interrupt (#10).
	- Then, the screen is just a buffer of 64000 bytes (one per pixel)
that starts at address 0A0000.
	- Now, you know how to plot a single pixel (that doesn't help
much, but it's a begining).
	- There are lots of interesting algorithms to draw lines, circles,
move blocks, put sprites, etc. (i have some, if you want them, just e-mail me)
	- And last but not least, don't forget to restore your user's
video mode (it's very annoying to find oneself at a 40*25 text screen).

	About your problem with the SVGA, I don't think there's a standard
for SVGA, so you are in big trouble.

	Anyway, I think that somewhere somebody has written a BGI for some SVGA,you might be able to find it.

	Hope that I've been helpful,

				Pablo Varela (mtl92205@oasis.dit.upm.es)
								     ^
                                                                     |
                                     that's Spain in Europe ---------+
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: pvr@wang.com ()
Subject: Re: Mouse driver source code
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 13:13:56 GMT

buxduac@dct.ac.uk writes:

>Does any body have the source code for a mouse driver, 
>any mouse will do.
>I would prefer C code if possible.

	I would like it too!

--
>>>>>>>>>>>> Peter Reilley ..... pvr@wiis.wang.com ..... KA1LAT <<<<<<<<<<<<<
                     Well, that about says it.
From: danodom@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Dan Odom)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: COMPILING SPEED
Date: 8 Nov 1992 08:37:06 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

dmurdoch@mast.queensu.ca (Duncan Murdoch) writes:

>Why do people accept such slow compile times?  Turbo Pascal demonstrates 
>that fast compiler technology exists.  Is C++ five times harder to compile 
>than TP?

Yes, it is.  Go write a compiler for Pascal.  Then write a compiler for
C++.  You'll see.
-- 
Dan Odom
Kansas State University
danodom@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
From: duanev@pulsar.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Duane Voth)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: HELP: bloated BC++ program (one of us needs relief...)
Date: 6 Nov 92 16:58:50 GMT

In comp.os.msdos.programmer, sam4628@zeus.tamu.edu writes:
> I have a small program (source below) which basically runs a COMMAND
> shell.  When in this shell, I do a MEM /C | MORE to check the size of
> the program, which turns out to be about 65702 bytes!!!  The executable
> is only a couple of K!  For the record, the parent program which this
> is distilled from is over 27K, but still takes up 65702 bytes according
> to MEM.

Borland C 3.x has a couple of unsigned ints that reside in the c.obj
preamble which control the amount of heap and stack resreved for the
program.  The default is go get as much heap and stack as possible
(values = 0).  Set them to some fixed value (4096 or so) and more of
your memory will remain free.  You'll have to play with the values
some - there are no good error messages produced when you make them
too small - your program will probably just stop running.   Outside
of all functions declare:

	extern unsigned int _heapsiz = 4096;
	extern unsigned int _stacksiz = 1024;

I don't remember the exact variable names so be sure to look in the
back of your Borland Programmers Guide in the section on extern variables.


-- 
--- duane voth                                  duanev@mpd.tandem.com
--- ALL systems are arbitrary!  Effectiveness is the measure of Truth
--
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: saghari@gorgon.ossi.com (Bahram Saghari,Bldg1-1,7481,4083547407,universe(ucb))
Subject: Who is the vendor?
Keywords: Who is the vendor?
Reply-To: saghari@gorgon.ossi.com
Organization: Open System Solutions, Inc.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 19:08:59 GMT

Good morning,
I was wondering if anyone knew who the vendor for any or all of the following DOS
products are:
	Design Plus
	Civil Soft
	CAD 12
	Surfer 5

Any information either where the packages can be obtained, or the vendors are
will be appreciated.


Cheers,
Bahram Saghari
saghari@ossi.com
P.S. Thanx



Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
From: cssjs2@ufhx1.ufh.ac.za (Mr I Scheepers)
Subject: Re: 386 Assembler Question - Easy one...
Organization: University of Fort Hare, Alice, Ciskei
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 11:48:31 GMT

In <1992Nov9.162931.1@camins.camosun.bc.ca> morley@camins.camosun.bc.ca writes:
>In 386 assembler I need to fill an extended register with 4 copies
>of the same byte.  Right now I'm using the following:

>   mov  al,VALUE
>   mov  ah,VALUE
>   shl  eax,16
>   mov  al,VALUE
>   mov  ah,VALUE

>I'm curious... is there a better/faster way to stuff the register?

How about:
	mov al,VALUE
	mov ah,al
	mov eax,ax