Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

FPC for DOS / FreeDOS (DOSX)

posted by marcov, 11.04.2008, 13:08

(snip freedos development model summary)

Yes, I know all that. But I was not talking about the core FreeDOS programmer, but rather the community at large.

Btw, there was a Microsoft Pascal, but the last version is from the eighties. (Windows 1.0 is rumoured to have been in Pascal, though it is hard to separate real facts from assumptions that result from of stdcall being a pascal like calling convention)

(still freedos:)
> The core people are more interested in refining things, updating webpages,
> online docs, FAQs, wiki, etc.,

And that is the same thing as with FPC. The core focusses on the core of the project. The outer reaches, like finishing touch, additional libraries etc, are done by the people actually interested in it.

> Stefan Weber uses VP. Laaca uses FP. Jason Burgon uses BP7. Jason Sinclair uses TP7.
> Others (MegaBrutal, Eric Auer) seem to occasionally use TP55 (free
> version).
>
> Maybe you should tell us exactly why FPC is better than all the others?
I can give you the opposite. The main problems with FPC:
- of all versions, a major weak point is that debugging is at a lower level and requires some retraining. Actually GDB and stuff like valgrind is more powerful than e.g. the TP debugger, but the TP debugger is more reliable and easier to learn/use.
- The later 1.0.x versions were pretty decent, but after 2000-2001 nobody invested much time in the dos port. Some minor things were fixed, and the basic system is workable again. However it requires simply some attention and maintaining to become a finished product again. And that is a pity, because the 2.x series is so much better in any way (rivaling Delphi rather than Turbo Pascal in speed and language)

IMHO in all other things FPC is better. The most crucial one being that FPC (and maybe GPC) are the only ones with any future at all.

> (Obviously: better license, more portable.) Or at least give us some idea
> of what HAS to be fixed. It must just need more publicity, then.
It needs a few people that simply use it, find bugs and describe them, one of which is able to fix most bugs himself, specially if they are dos specific (like DPMI exception handling etc, or being able to get a new version of GDB to work).

Note that Dos isn't the only platform with this problem. All the older and fringe platforms (OS/2, BeOS, AmigaOS) suffer from this.

If you really want the IDE back up to snuff, add some additional people that are capable of handling the textmode IDE. For this item, the same problem as Dos goes. The core only has time for minimal maintaining. Maybe not needed for you, but it will be if you want to get some users/testers interested.

> So VP is dead and FP for DOS is comatose? Not good. :-(
And GPC is also comatose, and maybe not even for just Dos. However it might get a breath of fresh air again, there is nothing fundamentally wrong there (like it is with VP). It could be simply something like the two maintianers being temporarily busy.

> I'm not blaming him, I don't know all the details (obviously). It just
> seems like he'd release whatever he legally could and "let the users worry
> with it". That's what most developers these days do. But whatever, I don't
> care either way.
That's what a lot of people said. But making up that balance was a monumental task in itself, and the chances of getting anything done were remote. He expected it would only lead to false hope, and directed the users to FPC to not fragment the rest some more. Have a look at:

http://web.archive.org/web/20060312071305/www.vpascal.com/comment.php?comment.news.16

> For sure, you can live without an IDE.
Then you are the only one in VP circles. And I can live without an IDE, but that's mainly because when you debug the system itself, additional layers only add to confusion. For my day job I use IDEs (Delphi to be specific, and a bit Lazarus on the side). Just to keep some productivity.

> Has he tried FPC? Does he like it? Maybe he can focus his energy into
> making that better instead of worrying about other stuff.

He quit the whole business, since not having the time anymore for a long consequtive was one of the reasons to stop in the first place. He directed the other users to VP, something that btw none of the users that tried to "fix" VP did. Which is something I regret, specially Veit K., since he was already a long way of being a valuable core member.

> (Although I still say any asm code he has might potentially be useful, but whatever
The trouble is that he had to do the hard work for your "potential" use. And that potential was considered negiable by all that have seen the source.

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22762 Postings in 2122 Threads, 402 registered users (0 online)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum