Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| [6 earlier articles] |
| Re: Free x86 C compiler wanted DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2007-04-08) |
| Re: Free x86 C compiler wanted gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2007-04-08) |
| Re: Free x86 C compiler wanted nmh@t3x.org (Nils M Holm) (2007-04-08) |
| Re: Free x86 C compiler wanted ang.usenet@gmail.com (Aaron Gray) (2007-04-11) |
| Re: Free x86 C compiler wanted gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2007-04-11) |
| Re: Free x86 C compiler wanted lpsantil@gmail.com (lpsantil@gmail.com) (2007-04-13) |
| Re: Free x86 C compiler wanted kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk (2007-04-13) |
| Re: Windows executables, was Free x86 C compiler wanted marcov@stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2007-04-14) |
| From: | kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 13 Apr 2007 12:49:19 -0400 |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| References: | 07-04-033 |
| Keywords: | C, MSDOS |
| Posted-Date: | 13 Apr 2007 12:49:19 EDT |
gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) wrote:
> Also, I believe that at
> least the later versions of DOS and most Windows will load EXE
> files with a COM extension. That was done for FORMAT, for
> example.
DOS decided what an executable format actually was by reading a header
in the program IIRC. The file designation COM, EXE etc. was only used to
decide what was executable and what was data. I don't know when it was
introduced but IIRC Windows 3.1 had a list of executable file types that
could be edited by the user.
Ken Young
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.