Re: [Sibyl] Which way?
On Thu, 16 May 2002, Yuri Prokushev wrote: But we have two problems. Syntax difference. FPC doesn't have APIENTRI, doesn't have imports. Also problems with CSTRING type. As I know FPC doesn't support this type. May be this is same as ANSISTRING. Some check required. I've checked these: APIENTRY can be searchreplace'd to cdecl; external. CSTRING[x] is a bit more tricky. At some places, it can be replaced with array[0..x] of char, and in some places (mostly at function parameters) they have to be changed to pchar, and the function will need small modifications. Unfortunately, this is not a nice and compatible solution. According to the documentation, FPC do support ansistrings. About imports in FPC, something like external 'PMWIN' index 220; compiled successfully. I don't know if it works, but compiled. Ok, so what do you think that some (for example me ;)) can work on changing the Sibyl rtl to compile with FPC, and meanwhile the others can use the SPC? Or is it a dead-end? Doodle -- Doodle --- PapirPosta: Kocsis Peter, 5363, Nagyiva'n, O~rsi 2/c OS/2 --- --- To unsubscribe yourself from this list, send the following message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] unsubscribe sibyl end
Re: [Sibyl] Which way?
On Thu, 16 May 2002 14:04:18 +0200 (MET DST), Doodle wrote: After a while, it looked like for me, that it would be easier and less work to do small changes to the Sibyl RTL to compile with FPC, than to do great changes to the FPC RTL to fit into Sibyl sources, which will need modifications anyway. So my proposal is to use all the Sibyl sources, even the system unit, instead the freepascal ones. What do you think about it? hmm because I'm not the one with pascal know how I won't answer this question :-) What would be the pro/contras to this sollution? cu Adrian -- Adrian Gschwend @ OS/2 Netlabs ICQ: 22419590 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- The OS/2 OpenSource Project: http://www.netlabs.org --- To unsubscribe yourself from this list, send the following message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] unsubscribe sibyl end
Re: [Sibyl] Which way?
On Thu, 16 May 2002, Adrian Gschwend wrote: So my proposal is to use all the Sibyl sources, even the system unit, instead the freepascal ones. What do you think about it? hmm because I'm not the one with pascal know how I won't answer this question :-) What would be the pro/contras to this sollution? IMO, pros would be: - it's less work to change the Sibyl RTL to compile with FPC than to change the FPC RTL to work with Sibyl - Better compatibility with existing sibyl programs as every method/function/unit-name/solution would be the same as before - The Sibyl RTL already has all the API definitions Contras: - The freepascal team would not profit from this project, at least not too much, and not in a multiplatform way.:) - The assembly syntax of FPC and Sibyl is very different, so the lot of Assembly parts of the Sibyl code would have to be changed to ATT assembler form, or FPC has to be switched to Intel assembler format, if possible. Feel free to expand the lists! Doodle -- Doodle --- PapirPosta: Kocsis Peter, 5363, Nagyiva'n, O~rsi 2/c OS/2 --- --- To unsubscribe yourself from this list, send the following message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] unsubscribe sibyl end
