From: robert@nospicedham.prino.org   
      
   On 2017-08-25 22:07, rugxulo@nospicedham.gmail.com wrote:   
   > 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.   
   The main.pas'es are:   
      
   chkdat.pas   
   lift.pas   
   dayform.pas   
   h-h2rtf.pas   
   h-h2html.pas   
      
   No diffs, just make the change.   
      
   > 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.   
      
   Only one hard change, the four longint's in hhcommon.pas (write_time) need to   
   be   
   changed into word. After that it compiles, but due to FPC optimizing out the   
   xxxx_top pointers none of the executables actually runs.   
      
   > 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.   
      
   Because this way everything is in one place. Will give it some thought.   
      
   >>>> 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.   
      
   Why this layout? See update_list_pointers in hhcommon.pas Basically been using   
   this since TP 3.01a (and on z/OS, using PL/I) and it should not break!   
      
   >> Will download 3.0.2 (last tried version was 2.6.?), and give it one more,   
   >> and absolutely final try.   
      
   As I already wrote, Crash, Boom, Bang, and code that looks as if it came   
   straight out of TP 1. Thanks, but no thanks, no more!   
      
   > 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.   
      
   ISO 7185 is a language to teach programming. Turbo Pascal is a language to   
   actually write working programs.   
      
   >> 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.   
      
   I don't use DOS, and the whole reason for going from BP7 to VP was to remove   
   any   
   space constraints, and be able to code in-line assembler without loads of db   
   overrides.   
      
   Robert   
   --   
   Robert AH Prins   
   robert(a)prino(d)org   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)