I would agree with Ralf on most points. As for the 16 bit C-Compiler, I think Turbo-C fits that bill but acquiring it legally requires a registration with embarcadero, so not exactly optimal and not everyone is an old hack like me, who started coding in 1989 and still legally owns nearly every Borland Compiler ever released. What is with the OpenWatcom compiler? Does that need an extender too? Else we're looking at a completely new project, and as much as I feel tempted by it, such work would only make sense if there was enough interest and at least a small group of people volunteering to work on it.
A 16-bit Pascal compiler would probably be the easier choice to start with as the language is better structured and easier to compile. The biggest barrier in my view is that FreeDOS is still a bit of a toy for old hacks like me, who can't let go of the past when programmers had to actually code properly instead of relying of monstrous languages that come with garbage collectors and whatnot and leave you with memory-leaking megabyte-sized executables. When I go into my local supermarket, they have these large LCD-screens that usually display the latest discount deals, but these days tell people to wear their mask and how far you need to stay away from each other. Every other day the thing bombs out with a windows blue screen and I thinks to myself - Why? Why run a windows system for what is effectively a simple slide show? This would be a prime example for slapping in a SBC with a small SD card and DOS in it. But it seems that nobody builds such SBCs, even though considering DOS's modest requirements, you'd think they could make such things dirt cheap. So apart from the software I think FreeDOS needs to find a market for serious use other than retro afficionados, and cheap SBCs would be something that could work. Maybe we should port FreeDOS to the raspberry Pi ;) Just kidding... Cheers, Danilo On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 05:12, Ralf Quint <freedos...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/29/2020 6:17 AM, zz zz wrote: > > I would much rather see some efforts in reviving some true DOS versions > of programming languages, in a open source form. That also run on DOS, not > require cross compiling on a multi-GB graphical OS. > > Sounds interesting, but what exactly do you mean by "DOS versions" of > such languages? As in previous versions of the C standard for example? or > perhaps the borland "mannerisms"? > > A easily working 16bit version of FreePascal that can compile a large > amount of old Turbo Pascal code, for example. And can run on DOS. Or a > proper DOS version of (Open)COMAL, a nice structured interpreted > programming language that to this day is still used to teach > programming, kind of like a "better BASIC". Or a true 16bit C compiler, > that runs on FreeDOS. Or a 16bit dBASE clone. Or Modula 2... > > In general, it would be nice to see some people really programming FOR > DOS again, creating useful Open Source DOS application that people can > actually use. Not just trying to recompile some behemoth Linux took that > isn't really suited for DOS, and that to make things work require > another behemoth development system ported from Linux, shoehorning both > into the limitations of DOS. > > Ralf > > > -- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freedos-devel mailing list > Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel >
_______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
