RE: What are Win2000 Diferance
Oh, right. I remember hearing about the 16-bit int used by Windows.
At the time I was using an Amiga where the int was 32-bit; I've
always thought of int's as being 32-bit and that's why
it didn't register.
Thanks, David.
-Ron T.
David Cuny wrote:
> Under Win95, most pointers returned in Win32Lib tended to be low memory
> addresses. So if you wrote a code like:
>
> int myVar
> myVar = getSomeWin32Pointer()
>
> under Win95, it would tend to work, because the addresses returned were
> small
> enough that they would fit into an int. It happened to me quite often:
> I'd
> test a program under Win95 and it would run fine, but under WinNT, it
> would
> crash.
>
> The error under WinNT would be attempting to store a large address into
> an
> int. That's because WinNT (and WinMe, Win2000 and even Wine under Linux)
>
> would tend to hand back pointer addresses that were too large to store
> in an
> int. The proper way to code the example would have been to use an atom
> instead of an int:
>
> atom myVar
>
> So basically, it was *always* an error to use an int, but because Win95
> tended to parcel out lower memory addresses, it was less likely to crash
>
> under Win95.
>
> -- David Cuny
>
> -- David Cuny
>
>
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|