From: Greg King (gngking_at_erols.com)
Date: 2003-05-04 22:35:39
From: Ullrich von Bassewitz Date: Tuesday, April 29, 2003, 05:05 AM > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 11:08:04PM +0200, Adam Dunkels wrote: > > Would something like this be of any value at all? > > Yes, that would be nice. There's somewhat more in the dio API, > but it's a start. Your implementation is quite portable, > and should work for other CBMs, too. > > One problem, however: The file-handles choosen may collide > with the ones used by the CBM file-I/O. I will have to add a > > #define CBM_FIRST_FREE_HANDLE xxx > > define somewhere in the headers, so programs using the CBM routines > can safely use CBM file-I/O with handles starting with that number. The CBM dio functions could be integrated with the POSIX family of functions. They could use close() and [the internal code of] open() to make the "#" buffer file, read() and write() to move the sector-data, and writediskcmd and readdiskerror to send CBM-DOS's "u1" and "u2" commands. Then, there would be no conflicts. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2003-05-04 23:42:57 CEST