Hello, As for myself, I attempted to compile FD-KEYB with FPC 16-bit, which I find to be a good proof, as it has heavy parts in Assembler, other parts in Pascal, and many procedure-type variables.
It helped me fix a couple of minor (almost cometic) failures in the code. But I did not succeed. The problems came when mangling with procedure/function-type variables especially with far/near procedures, etc. I posted in the list, but I assume that DOS programming is not that exciting these days. I tried to isolate the problem, but when requested to post the whole program, I did not get any useful replies in the mailing list, so I quitted. Maybe to retry some day :) (all the other corrections were pushed into the latest KEYB version). Aitor On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 at 02:46, Ralf Quint <freedos...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/12/2023 5:08 PM, Jim Hall wrote: > > A user emailed me (late last year) with a bug/issue report on > > FreePascal in FreeDOS 1.3. I was going to (finally) reply to say they > > really should ask the FreePascal people about this, but I realized I > > couldn't really make out what they were saying. This is the part of > > their email that relates to the FreePascal problem: > > > >> I believe this is a Free Pascal issue because the short > >> hello world test works, but if you decide to use any > >> objects, the Video unit is completely missing. There is > >> reference to consolidation of the video functions but no > >> references to where the the functions in that unit went. > >> Actually as good as Free Pascal are, they are getting > >> pretty sloppy with keeping their work updates current in > >> their wiki. There are a lot of circular references that > >> are dead ends when it comes to useful information for > >> experienced users. > > > > Not sure what this is talking about, but I'm not a Pascal programmer. > > And their email kept going off onto tangents, so it was hard to > > follow. Does this "bug report" make sense to anyone? > > Well, (s)he is rather thin on any details, but it sounds as if the OP > expects that FreePascal is a drop-in replacement for Turbo-Pascal. Which > it isn't. > > The 16bit x86 (DOS) version is a bit of a step child at FreePascal, and > I am not sure how usable the latest version of this actually is. This is > on my to-do list, unfortunately currently further to the end of that, to > check and verify how much work it is to get old Turbo Pascal stuff > working with the 16bit version. And the 32bit version (using the GO32 > DOS Extender) has also been behind the general development of FP, with > some of the OOP stuff probably not applicable at all anymore. > > > Ralf > > > > Ralf > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freedos-devel mailing list > Freedosemail@example.com > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel >
_______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedosfirstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel