Hi,   
      
   On Wednesday, August 23, 2017 at 4:05:47 AM UTC-5, Robert Prins wrote:   
   > On 2017-08-22 19:38, rugxulo@nospicedham wrote:> On Monday, August 21,   
   >   
   > The files that you need is "lift-snapshot@2017-08-20.rar"   
   > To stop Google from falsely claiming that it contains a virus   
      
   I see lots of sources, but nothing obvious on how to compile with FPC.   
   (What's the main .PAS ? Where's the diff/patch? .BATs are for VP only.)   
      
   You keep saying that FPC won't work, but all I hear is how many   
   changes you have to make to even get it to compile. It shouldn't   
   be this hard.   
      
   BTW, not to defend bad antivirus heuristics, but it might go easier   
   if you kept sources (plain text) separate from binary blobs in a   
   different archive.   
      
   >  >> The source files contains both Pure Pascal and assemblerised sections,   
   >  >> and, with one small tweak, FPC actually compiles the Pure Pascal version.   
   >  >   
   >  > I find that unlikely. FPC is highly compatible with TP.   
   >   
   > No, unlike TP/BP/VP, FPC will not honour the convention that three   
   > variables in a const declaration are kept together as packed, i.e.   
   >   
   > const   
   >    lift_ptr: liftptr = nil;   
   >    lift_top: liftptr = nil;   
   >    lift_end: liftptr = nil;   
      
   Not sure why you're relying on that specific layout. All system-   
   specific code should be separated (or avoided). Otherwise, as   
   you've noticed, there's little gain in HLLs.   
      
   > Will download 3.0.2 (last tried version was 2.6.?), and give it one more, and   
   > absolutely final try.   
      
   I just don't even know where to start looking to compile this, though.   
      
   > I tried GPC more than a decade ago, actually before I switched to VP. Never   
   > could get it to work.   
      
   The benefit of standardization (and a public test suite and spec) is that   
   you shouldn't have this problem with conformant code.   
      
   >  >>> Or try this (ISO 7185) with modern GCC: (p5c)   
   >  >   
   >  > Here I'm talking more about actual working code translation for "modern"   
   >  > GCC, with its multitude of optimizations, than anything else.   
   >   
   > Maybe, but when the page on SourceForge told me   
   >   
   > "The project also contains p5x - pascal with extensions to the standard   
   pascal   
   > language (underscores allowed in identifiers, otherwise in case statement,   
   > constant expressions, etc)"   
   >   
   > it made me realize that the effort needed to convert my code would be way   
   over   
   > the top, as my code contains way too many of such "Borland-isms".   
      
   Well, yes, {$mode tp} is fairly incompatible with ISO 7185. That was   
   their choice to be non-standard. And similarly few others cared or   
   agreed on much later on either. Pascal has (too) many variants.   
      
   > And next to that I have little interest in installing GCC...   
      
   Well, for DOS, it's only five .ZIPs, unpack, set two env. vars, and   
   you're ready. Extremely easy, even under a VM. And GPC also supports   
   {$borland-pascal} mode.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)