New answers tagged

1

It's a management decision. Your management should be in a position to determine how much money they are making by supporting Windows 3.11. If they have any brains they will realise that customers who complain if you don't support them for free don't actually make you money. You can support them by telling them what the cost of supporting an old version is. ...


3

I think this is more of an issue about getting virtualbox or vmware to provide access to the hosts serial port than it is about virtualization OS or even the guest OS. I would start with a host system running a modern OS (win 7/8/10 or Linux distro) with a USB to serial port adapter that is based on a real rs-232 implementation, such as the prolific pl2303. ...


4

drivers for some of the custom hardware belonging to the solution are not compatible with later Windows This is the crux of the matter. You can recompile your legacy C program with a newer Visual Studio, fix up all the compiler warnings and errors, and generally turn an old system into an identical one that runs on Windows 7 (or later if you must) but ...


4

Could someone write an opensource version of the Windows API? Yes, but you are asking the wrong question! Okay, after that teaser ;-) let's step back a bit. The answer to the question "can someone write X" is almost always "Yes". Unless it is "No". Well, okay, that's not terribly helpful. Obviously, the answer to a Yes/No question is either Yes or No. ...


0

Not... really. You can implement most APIs that way but some of them fundamentally expose the model used by the operating system. For example, consider fork(), which basically has no possible Windows implementation. In the general case, you can do, but for specific APIs, it may be that the underlying OS such as Linux simply does not offer that feature.


0

Let's imagine that after doing each test, you had to analyze some data you recorded, and write those results out, and lets say that analysis is a somewhat computationally expensive operation and can't start until all the data is collected, while the configuration of the hardware and recording the data is cheap but it a lot of waiting. It could then make ...


1

Async/await is just syntactic sugar for using Tasks. In fact, async/await makes the code able to be more procedural rather than get caught in the callback pit. For instance, one (not great) way to run a task after another task would be: var task = StartSomething(); var continuation = task.ContinueWith(t => { var task2 = StartSomethingElse(t.Result); ...


0

I'd leave well enough alone. There is a time and place for sequential code and it sounds like you have a textbook example. Async/await are useful tools, but not the right tools for the problem you're solving. Put this another way, which code would be easier to maintain - your current code or code restructured to use async/await?



Top 50 recent answers are included