Sujet : Re: OT: horrible 8086 segmentation
De : admin (at) *nospam* 127.0.0.1 (Kerr-Mudd, John)
Groupes : comp.sys.raspberry-piDate : 18. Dec 2024, 21:33:27
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Dis
Message-ID : <20241218203327.7a07339b20461651c3432767@127.0.0.1>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6
User-Agent : Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.30; i686-pc-mingw32)
On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 18:02:34 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <
cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
On 2024-12-18, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 19:42:18 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
Intel put the "backward" in "backward compatible".
>
I recall the term “backward combatible” used to describe the feelings of
violence some people had towards the requirement for backward
compatibility with certain kinds of brain death ...
Then there's "bug-compatible", where so many people and systems
have adapted to an existing bug that you can't fix it without
breaking just about everything - so any future versions have
to also contain the bug, or at least a good emulation of it.
Qwerty keyboards being a prime example.
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
OT: horrible 8086 segmentation
Re: OT: horrible 8086 segmentation