On Fri, 17 May 2002, Yuri Prokushev wrote:
> Ghm :) I already port some units to fpc (with spc support). My primary
> target is FORMS unit. This is the major unit for sibyl recompilation.
I agree.
> But for this requred classes and sysutils modules. Classes uses sysutils.
> For sysutils requred pmhelp. But pmhelp uses apphandle function wich
> defined in system unit. But fpc system unit doesn't contain this or equal
> function :( This is problem number one. Second problem is exceptions. My
> current hack is incorrect (in bsedos.pas). SysException must be rewrited
> as child of fpc root exception class.
And you will find a lot more problems with different implementation of
exceptions under FPC and Sibyl.
Then, there are problems with the basic Object type. Sibyl has different
implementation and methods, which are used by the Sibyl GUI too (in the
object inspector window).
That's the main reason why I thought that I should better port the full
sibyl sources (system.pas and others) to FPC than change the FPC sources
for Sibyl.
[...]
> All work must be based on at least fpc system unit.
Err... Sorry, it might be a stupid question, but why? :)
> I know about future problems with sibyl applications. Some rework will be
> required for migration to OpenSibyl (At least for application wich uses
> imports, APIENTRY, CSTRING, C style comments (/*) and some other things).
Yep.
> PS: I'm not sure, but we can have problems with 16-bit function calls for
> console apps.
That needs thunking, that is, IMHO, implemented in the Sibyl sources.
(One more pro for using them instead of the FPC RTL..;)) )
Bye!
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
