Re: DRL updated! -- please stop that INT discussion! ( FPC )

Hi,
my experience so far:

C, with lowlevel stuff -> Linux: annoying
C, nicely written -> easy port to Linux
C for Linux -> need to add lowlevel stuff for DOS versions (I still need
  somebody to put the lowlevel drive access for DOSFSCK for DOS together,
  I do not have the time right now to provide more than the hints I already
  provided.
Pascal, for DOS -> almost impossible to port to gpc and p2c. Did not try FPC
  yet for a Linux port (but have rewritten the program in Perl, more powerful
  in that case anyway).
C for Linux -> hard to port to 16bit if not nicely written to make clear where
  32bit int are needed and where too much RAM is used
C for Linux, not lowlevel -> easy to port to DOS 32bit with DJGPP


So nice to hear that FPC is very "Borland-ish" which should ease porting
16bit Borland (Turbo) Pascal programs to both 32bit DOS FPC and 32bit Linux
FPC versions, but I simply did not try yet. And again, 32bit is not recommended
for DRL anyway. If you need DRL for Linux, the question would be how good FPC
emulates the CRT and DOS units and if it is possible to replace the remaining
direct intr() and [$40:xx] accesses thet it uses.

However, none of my bussiness! I am fine with the 16bit version, and the
code of DRL is too spaghetti anyway, so I would probably prefer writing a
Perl or C version if I wanted DRL to exist in Linux.

Eric