Re: Question about UMBs

> >     Why not? If upper memory block will too small for your code, then
this
> >mean that your code too big to be useful or that upper memory too small.
there isn't yet any DOS-UMB. only UMB-UMB

> The speculation was about finding a free block of memory in an area used 
> for ROM shadowing. The resident code should be easily small enough even 
> if there's only a single 512-byte page left in a 16K block. And if 
> there's no block, I'll just take a small part out of the normal UMBs.

of course, you could move your code to c810:0, but don't forget
to unlink from XMS chain when done.

given that a straight UMB handler can be done in ~162(dez) byte, it can
save you
many headaches to remain resident in conventional memory.

tom