Kagamin wrote:
> Walter Bright Wrote:
> 
>> Actually, you can have a segmented model on a 32 bit machine rather than a
>> flat model, with separate segments for code, data, and stack. The Digital
>> Mars DOS Extender actually does this. The advantage of it is you cannot
>> execute data on the stack.
> 
> AFAIK you inevitably have segments in flat model, x86 just doesn't work in
> other way.  On windows stack segment seems to be the same as data segment,
> code segment is different. Are they needed for access check? I thought access
> modes are checked in page tables.

Operating systems choose to set the segment registers to all the same value which results in the 'flat' model, but many other models are possible with the x86 hardware.

Is it true that you're not allowed to play with the segment registers in 32bit flat protected mode?

Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> Is it true that you're not allowed to play with the segment registers
> in 32bit flat protected mode?

Yes, that's the operating system's job.

On 2/17/11, Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>> Is it true that you're not allowed to play with the segment registers in 32bit flat protected mode?
>
> Yes, that's the operating system's job.
>

They took our jerbs!

Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 2/17/11, Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>> Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>>> Is it true that you're not allowed to play with the segment registers
>>> in 32bit flat protected mode?
>> Yes, that's the operating system's job.
>>
> 
> They took our jerbs!

You can always start your own company and hire yourself, or write your own operating system and set the segment registers!

"Russel Winder" <russel@russel.org.uk> wrote in message news:mailman.1748.1297936806.4748.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com...
> A word is the natural length of an integer item in the processor. It is necessarily machine specific.  cf. DEC-10 had 9-bit bytes and 36-bit word, IBM 370 has an 8-bit byte and a 32-bit word, though addresses were 24-bit.  ix86 follows IBM 8-bit byte and 32-bit word.

Right. Programmers may have gotten used to "word" being 2-bytes due to things like the Win API and x86 Assemblers not updating their usage for the sake of backwards compatibility, but in the EE world where the term originates, "word" is device-specific and is very useful as such.

> Do not be afraid of the word.  Fear leads to anger.  Anger leads to hate.  Hate leads to suffering. (*)

This version is better: http://media.bigoo.ws/content/image/funny/funny_1309.jpg

"Walter Bright" <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:ijk6la$1d9a$1@digitalmars.com...
> Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>> On 2/17/11, Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>> Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>>>> Is it true that you're not allowed to play with the segment registers in 32bit flat protected mode?
>>> Yes, that's the operating system's job.
>>>
>>
>> They took our jerbs!
>
> You can always start your own company and hire yourself, or write your own operating system and set the segment registers!

"They took our jerbs!" is a South Park reference.

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Walter Bright" <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:ijk6la$1d9a$1@digitalmars.com...
>> Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>>> On 2/17/11, Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>>> Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>>>>> Is it true that you're not allowed to play with the segment registers
>>>>> in 32bit flat protected mode?
>>>> Yes, that's the operating system's job.
>>>>
>>> They took our jerbs!
>> You can always start your own company and hire yourself, or write your own operating system and set the segment registers!
> 
> "They took our jerbs!" is a South Park reference.

I've seen it everywhere on the intarnets.

On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 11:09 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
> Russel Winder wrote:
> > Do not be afraid of the word.  Fear leads to anger.  Anger leads to hate.  Hate leads to suffering. (*)
> 
> > (*) With apologies to Master Yoda (**) for any misquote.
> 
> "Luke, trust your feelings!" -- Oggie Ben Doggie
> 
> Of course, expecting consistency from Star Wars is a waste of time.

"What -- me worry?"  Alfred E Newman  (*)

Star Wars is like Dr Who you expect revisionist history in every episode.  I hate an inconsistent storyline, so the trick is to assume each episode is a completely separate story unrelated to any other episode.


(*) Or whoever http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_E._Neuman
-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@russel.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

On Thursday 17 February 2011 23:09:32 Russel Winder wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 11:09 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
> > Russel Winder wrote:
> > > Do not be afraid of the word.  Fear leads to anger.  Anger leads to hate.  Hate leads to suffering. (*)
> > > 
> > > (*) With apologies to Master Yoda (**) for any misquote.
> > 
> > "Luke, trust your feelings!" -- Oggie Ben Doggie
> > 
> > Of course, expecting consistency from Star Wars is a waste of time.
> 
> "What -- me worry?"  Alfred E Newman  (*)
> 
> Star Wars is like Dr Who you expect revisionist history in every episode.  I hate an inconsistent storyline, so the trick is to assume each episode is a completely separate story unrelated to any other episode.

The funny thing is that Doctor Who does a number of things which I would normally consider to make a show a bad show - such as being inconsistent in its timeline and generally being episodic rather than having real story arcs (though some of the newer Doctor Who stuff has had more of a story arc than was typical in the past) - but in spite of all that, it's an absolutely fantastic show - probably because the Doctor's just so much fun. Still, it's interesting how it generally breaks the rules of good storytelling and yet is still so great to watch.

- Jonathan M Davis