From: "Yuri Prokushev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date sent: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 08:30:11 -0400 (EDT)
Send reply to: "Yuri Prokushev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Priority: Normal
Subject: Re: [Sibyl] Answers needed
Sorry for not replying until now - I was on holidays in France for
the last two weeks.
.
.
> >> We doesn't have compiler/debugger. compiler.pas/spc25.pas uses
> >> spdll25.dll where real compiler placed. Same for debugger.
> > ... and the interface isn't documented at all, right... :-(
> :) 2 function for compiler and all sources for interface.
> InvokeCompiler/BreakConpiler. Compiler works in its own thread. I
> don't see any problems.
.
.
You have to pass the command line options according to the setting
from the IDE. What about parsing the compiler output to be able to
find out location of possible errors and giving it back to the IDE?
> >> We are using original compiler from speedsoft sibyl 3 fix 4 for
> >first
> >> time until porting will be finished.
> > I suspect porting won't be the major part then - the trouble will
> >come with pasting the compiler to the IDE.
> Well. I see some problems with resources/forms, but I'm not sure. But
> I don't see any problems with compiler integration. Much work with
> command-line keys, of couse.
Yes, command line options were one of points I was thinking about.
> > BTW, we're still missing a
> >debugger - OS/2 GDB only works with EMX executables. :-(
> I prefer solve problems step-by-step. For current time it is
> doscalls/bsedos.pas :)
Yes, of course. I just wanted to mention this fact to make a
complete picture. In addition, somebody might already have a solution
for this or might come around something, so I considered raising the
point as useful.
BTW, I'm already subscribed to the list, so you don't have Cc: your
messages to my own address.
Tomas
-----------
To unsubscribe yourself from this list, send the following message
to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unsubscribe sibyl
end
