[Lazarus] Troll Tech and Inprise/Borland Collaborate on LinuxGUI

Curtis White cwhite at aracnet.com
Fri Apr 28 21:24:56 EDT 2000

Florian Klaempfl wrote:

> > Unless I am wrong about how all this stuff works at a lower level, I
> > don't see any reason that the compiler should need to support C++. Can
> > someone explain to me what I am missing here?
> A lot, the low level stuff works completly different:
> - Qt uses C++ classes but the FPC class modell isn't compatible with that
>   one used by egcs (and that one used by egcs isn't compatible with
>   that of gcc :()
> - MI requires a lot of changes (syntactical and semantical)
> - C++ uses a complete different exception handling model

So if I compile a .so file with gcc and then I compile a .so file with FPC, do
those two .so files work differently internally?  This is really confusing to
me because I had thought an executable was the same no matter which compiler
it was compiled with.  I always thought the compiler just took the source code
and made it into assembly and then the linker turned it into binary code. I
didn't know that the binary code was different depending on which compiler you
use. That is interesting.

What about on Windows? Is an .exe or .dll file that is compiled with FPC
different than an .exe or .dll file compiled with Borland C++ Builder or MS
Visual C++ or Delphi?

> >
> > How hard would it be to add that support to the compiler if it is needed?
> >
> It IS hard but I'am working on it :)

Great!  Is it planned for version 1.0 or later?


More information about the Lazarus mailing list