RTS.dll for gpcp-1.3.3-JVM?

Oct 11, 2011 at 11:16 AM

I recognize that this is a Microsoft forum, so I apologize if this question is out of place.

I recently downloaded gpcp-1.3.3-JVM from http://plas.fit.qut.edu.au/gpcp/Downloads.aspx for use on my Mac.  That download did not come with a version of RTS.dll.

Because I have Mono running on my Mac, I wanted to use my JVM-based GPCP compiler to build for Mono.  I can compile using "cprun gpcp --target=net" and assemble with "ilasm" that comes with Mono, but to run the programs I need RTS.dll.

I've pulled the RTS.dll from the version 1.3.11 of the GPCP distribution here, and things seem to work.  But I noticed that the symbol file RTS.cps and the "source file" RTS.cp differ between the 1.3.11 here and the older 1.3.3-JVM version I'm running.

Are there any incompatibilities I should be aware of if I use the 1.3.11 RTS.dll with the older 1.3.3 compiler?  Or should I wait for a newer version of the JVM-based version of GPCP?

I've had some problems running the 1.3.11 GPCP compiler under Mono, so that's not an option.



Oct 16, 2011 at 10:11 AM
Edited Oct 16, 2011 at 10:12 AM

Hi jmerrick.  I have promised to put up the JVM code on the gpcp.  Still hope to get to that this week.

The situation with RTS.dll is a bit complicated.  The support functions that are visible to the user appear in the dummy symbol file RTS.cp and RTS.cps.  However the real DLL has a number of extra functions that are code helpers.  The compiler generates calls to these, but they are invisible to the Component Pascal programmer.  I would need to check the CVS, but I think the main changes to RTS over the last year or so, has been a bit more care with the localization of the built in string conversion functions.  Thus I think that the changes are probably bug fixes rather than changes in functionality.

If the RTS.dll that you got here works for you, fine.  If you run into problems you could first try using Mono to compile the sources from here.  Otherwise I can probably retrieve the source for the 1.3.3 version.  Let me know how you go.

Oct 21, 2011 at 5:20 PM

I'll just wait for the latest JVM version to be posted here.  I'm not in any rush.  Thanks.