[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Low-level vs. High-level programming
- Subject: Re: Low-level vs. High-level programming
- From: "White Flame \(aka David Holz\)" <whiteflame52@y.a.h.o.o.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 02:17:47 -0700
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm, comp.sys.apple2, rec.games.video.classic, comp.os.cpm
- Organization: Network Access Services, Inc.
- References: <b3qo6h$5ar$1@barad-dur.nas.com> <rhcIa.7524$nY2.2383@fe07.atl2.webusenet.com> <Xns939FBF8A5AB4wildstar128hotmailco@2 <EHrJa.16254$bH3.337@fe02.atl2.webusenet.com> <bd696r$15en$1@merope.saaf.se>
- Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.sys.cbm:59160 comp.sys.apple2:31794 rec.games.video.classic:59306 comp.os.cpm:13496
"Paul Schlyter" <pausch@saaf.se> wrote in message
news:bd696r$15en$1@merope.saaf.se...
> unsigned int memory_address = <address_of_memory_mapped_HW-device>;
That's fairly ugly, and isn't guaranteed to work, since there's no
requirements that ints be as wide as pointers. If memory_address were a
void*, it would be quite kosher.
--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
http://www.white-flame.com/
(spamblock in effect)