#LyX 1.6.6.1 created this file. For more info see http://www.lyx.org/
\lyxformat 345
\begin_document
\begin_header
\textclass article
\begin_preamble
\usepackage{times}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\end_preamble
\use_default_options false
\language english
\inputencoding auto
\font_roman default
\font_sans default
\font_typewriter default
\font_default_family default
\font_sc false
\font_osf false
\font_sf_scale 100
\font_tt_scale 100

\graphics default
\paperfontsize default
\spacing single
\use_hyperref false
\papersize a4paper
\use_geometry true
\use_amsmath 1
\use_esint 0
\cite_engine basic
\use_bibtopic false
\paperorientation portrait
\leftmargin 1.5cm
\topmargin 1cm
\rightmargin 1.5cm
\bottommargin 1cm
\footskip 0.5cm
\secnumdepth 3
\tocdepth 3
\paragraph_separation indent
\defskip medskip
\quotes_language english
\papercolumns 1
\papersides 1
\paperpagestyle default
\tracking_changes false
\output_changes false
\author "" 
\author "" 
\end_header

\begin_body

\begin_layout Title
Porting Delphi/Kylix code to FPC;
\end_layout

\begin_layout Title
Creating a portable Pascal codebase.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Author
Marco van de Voort
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Current version: 0.03
\end_layout

\begin_layout Section*
Versioning
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
A lot has happened since the original version.
 Kylix can be considered dead for all practical purposes nowadays.
 Tiburon will have a gigantic impact on anything that handles string.
 2.3.x is a bit more Delphi compatible again, specially in the dispatch COM
 and olevariant direction.
 So it was time to update the FAQ, and prepare it for the host of Tiburon
 related issues that are coming.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
v0.01 The original (2005) version without a version number.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
v0.02 Updated in 2008
\end_layout

\begin_deeper
\begin_layout Description
v0.02b minor updates in September 2009
\end_layout

\end_deeper
\begin_layout Description
v0.03 Additions during summer 2010
\end_layout

\begin_layout Section
Introduction
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
There is a lot of (Object) Pascal code available on the web, usually for
 Turbo Pascal and Delphi.
 Since Free Pascal supports both these dialects, most code should in theory
 be recompilable with FPC.
 (and to a lesser degree with other compilers with the appropiate Borland
 mode) The main showstopper problems are a too big dependancy on 16-bit
 functionality (TP/BP), or on the Visual part of the VCL (Delphi).
 A lot of Delphi code is also too Windows dependant for use on other platforms,
 but this (the Windows dependance) is no real long term problem for FPC/win32.
 There can be a few small problems though because not all Delphi winapi
 units are supported at the moment.
 Currently most code that can be shared between FPC and Delphi are libraries
 that are not visual, but since Lazarus
\begin_inset Foot
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout
Lazarus (http://lazarus.freepascal.org ) is a graphical IDE/RAD for Free Pascal.
\end_layout

\end_inset

 is maturing fast, this will improve in time.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
In early 2000, I started to test FPC with Delphi code, mostly to test the
 new Delphi compability mode of FPC.
 Quite soon, it turned out that the Delphi compability of the 1.0.x compiler
 series was too limited, so I switched to the development series (1.1.x/1.9.x,
 which will become 2.0.x in the future).
 Since then I have kept on getting Delphi packages to work with FPC, to
 test new features, libraries etc.
 The packages that were regularly tested for FPC compability are:
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Jedi Winapi headers (current status: 99% working, most of the remain problems
 are related to dispinterfaces)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
ICS networking components (current status: win32 works fine with recent
 release versions of both ICS and FPC, the problems were in the preprocessor
 area and uses clauses mostly) This package pretty much was the first to
 get selected, mostly because it was compatible with a lot of Delphi versions.
 Some work has been done on getting the Kylix port to run on *nix platforms,
 but this is hard, since a lot of linux specific functionality and artefacts
 are exist, due to the heavy libc unit dependance) 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Jedi JCL (large parts working, but this is the most difficult package by
 far, since it is mostly a collection of all kinds of OS dependant routines)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Decal, a STL substitute (compiles with fairly minimal changes, but hard
 to test without demoes)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Jedi SDL headers (Works pretty well)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Jedi Math
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Other packages were tested on an incidental basis too.
 Because of all this testing, a set of common problems started to surface
 which are usually 
\emph on
not
\emph default
 FPC specific.
 These problems are more about multiplatform and multicompiler design, specially
 related to preprocessor (defines, ifdef's) symbols, most of the others
 with adding units to the USES clause without thinking.
 Most packages don't seem to spend any effort to come up with a decent system
 behind the preprocessor symbols (DEFINE/IFDEF's).
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
The most common problems while porting software occur in the following categorie
s:
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
True multiplatform considerations, like processor and OS dependant code.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
preprocessor symbols.
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
separation of general (Object) Pascal code and visual code.
 (widgetset dependant
\begin_inset Foot
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout
A widget is the general term for what is often called 
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

a control
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

 in windows terminology.
\end_layout

\end_inset

 is a better term for this category)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
...
 These problems are very common in the Delphi/Pascal world.
 Most can be avoided relatively easy in the early design stage and hopefully
 this article increases programmers awareness regarding these issues.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Section
A generic preprocessor design.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
As said in the previous paragraph, one of the primary problems of existing
 Delphi packages
\begin_inset Foot
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout
Some of the above mentioned packages already changed their ways, when they
 started implementing FPC compability
\end_layout

\end_inset

 is that there usually is no system with respect to preprocessor defines.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Nearly each unit has some preprocessor defines and compiler switches in
 the first few lines of the unit.
 FPC needs a few modifications here to put the FPC compiler in Delphi mode
 ( {$mode Delphi} ), if it is to compile delphi code without additional
 commandline arguments.
 Usually there are some package specific defines too.
 The problem is that Delphi packages typically duplicate the few defines
 they need in all units, often even directly using Delphi VER<xx> defines
 instead of using a central includefile that defines properties.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
The solution is as obvious as simple: a central include file that maps compiler
 versions to compiler and rtl properties.
 Preferably two even, one for the libraries, and one (extra) for the demoes/exam
ples with extra directives for final programs.
 The average reader will probably frown on this trivial detail, but believe
 me, when porting, this very simple change saves an enormous amount of work.
 Specially if this is carefully set up, and some standard problems are avoided.
 The rest of this chapter describes a good way to do this, mostly in the
 form of do's and don'ts.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
This kind of solution is not about FPC compatibility per se.
 How more complex the Delphi tree becomes (Kylix, Tiburon, .NET, 64-bit),
 the more worthwhile it is to put some effort into structuring defines.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard

\series bold
Note 
\series default
that since the first version of this faq several Jedi projects have adapted
 to this principle.
 Examining e.g.
 the Jedi JCL source is a good way to get an idea how to implement this
 in practice.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection

\emph on
Do
\emph default
 use a central includefile with defines in EVERY file 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
A lot of Delphi programmers have a natural aversion against includefiles.
 This probably stems from the fact that C uses them heavily, and Borland
 also doesn't really encourage the usage of includefiles.
 The gigantically complicated automake and autoconf systems have often scared
 Delphi programmers into a 
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

anything but that
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

 kind of attitude.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
However nearly each project that reaches a certain size starts to use a
 central includefile when faced with multiple compilers and/or -versions.
 The contents vary, but usually contain defines that optionally add extra
 debugging code, turn parts off etc.
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
The main reason for including the central includefile by default in 
\emph on
every
\emph default
 file, is that when creating a certain package for compiler A, you usually
 can't predict in which units the includefile is also needed in the future.
 E.g.
 when somebody tries to implement compiler/rtl/OS dependant parts for a
 compiler (version) B, with as little changes as possible.
 It is simpler to simply give up administrating why unit X needs the includefile
, and unit Y doesn't, and simply include it everywhere.
 This avoids creeping-in of local defines via the backdoor.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection

\emph on
Don't
\emph default
 make your main sourcecode directly dependant on Delphi version defines
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
A lot of Delphi packages directly use Delphi version defines in their source
 code, like
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef ver90}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
Dosomething;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$else}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
Dosomethingelse;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Some others hide this a bit by using defines like 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|Delphi4up| or 
\backslash
verb|Delphi4plus| 
\end_layout

\end_inset

, (the Mike Lischke style that was also used in older Jedi includefiles)
 but that is the same thing in practice.
 Conditional code should never interact directly with the Delphi versions.
 Why? The main reason is that FPC is Delphi 2 in some respect, and Delphi
 7 in another respect, but also for Delphi usage this is a bit dangerous;
 consider the following bit of code:
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef delphi4up}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
something=array of integer; // dynamic array
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$else
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
something =^integer;        // workaround using pointers;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code

\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
What if we encounter a problem with the dynamic array support for this particula
r construct in say Delphi 5? It is hard to disable dynamic arrays usage
 for Delphi 5 alone, since the source code assumes D4+ can use dynamic arrays,
 and 
\emph on
all
\emph default
 defines that interact with 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|ver<x>| 
\end_layout

\end_inset

 defines and derived 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|delphi4plus| 
\end_layout

\end_inset

 variants will have to be checked to make exceptions for Delphi 5.
 Runtime library changes are even more problematic.
 Sometimes a feature got added with D3, changed to use D4 features like
 int64 and cardinal, but moved to another unit with D6 or D7, and will be
 different again with .NET.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
In other words: the main problem is that
\emph on
 a certain 
\emph default

\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|ver<x>|
\end_layout

\begin_layout Plain Layout

\end_layout

\begin_layout Plain Layout

\end_layout

\end_inset


\emph on
 define stands for a lot of different compiler properties, and the source
 loses information if you use these defines directly
\emph default
.
 This problem is illustrated in the following similar source bit:
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
type
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef Delphi4plus}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
  something = array of integer;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
  myfunc    = function (something:integer=50):pointer; 
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$else
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
  something = ^integer;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
  myfunc    = function (something:integer):pointer; 
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}  
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
..
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
..
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
Uses
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef Delphi4plus}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
  variants
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
,windows;
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
While this example might not be ideal, it does illustrate the basic problem,
 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|Delphi4plus| 
\end_layout

\end_inset

 define is used to trigger both default parameters, variants and dynamic
 arrays u4sage.
 Usually the (mis)usage of the 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|ver<x>| 
\end_layout

\end_inset

 defines are not limited to language features, but also for identifiers
 exported by system, sysutils and other basic units.
 It is simply impossible to automatically determine if a certain ifdef is
 for an identifier, a language feature or something else, without knowing
 all compilers and compilerversions involved intimately.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard

\series bold
The solution
\series default
 is as obvious as simple.
 Each often used capability of the compiler-library system gets its own
 preprocessor symbol, and the mapping between 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|ver<x>|
\end_layout

\end_inset

 defines and these capabilities is done in the central include file.
 So everything after Delphi 4 defines HAS_DYNAMIC_ARRAY, HAS_DEFAULT_PARAMS
 etc.
 This allows a non Delphi compiler to define e.g.
 HAS_DEFAULT_PARAMS, but not HAS_DYNAMIC_ARRAY, something that is not possible
 when 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|ver<x>|
\end_layout

\end_inset

 is used directly in source.
 But it also allows to disable a certain feature for a certain Delphi version
 (e.g.
 when it is bugged) without having an effect on the other capabilities of
 that version, even temporarily for testing purposes only (simply comment
 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|{$DEFINE HAS_DYNAMIC ARRAYS}|
\end_layout

\end_inset

 in the 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|{$ifdef ver120}|
\end_layout

\end_inset

 part of the central includefile)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
A typical includefile of a project that uses capabilities instead of Delphi
 versions might look like this:
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef ver80}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define i386}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define CPU32}                // 32-bits CPU
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define ENDIAN_LITTLE}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define has_classes}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define win16}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
..
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
..
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef ver140}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define has_dynarray}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define has_defparam}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define i386}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define ENDIAN_LITTLE}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define CPU32}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define win32}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define has_stream_permissions}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
..
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
..
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef FPC}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
   {$mode Delphi}   // put in Delphi mode
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifndef ver1_0}  { only in   FPC version 2+}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
   {$define has_dynarray}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
   {$define has_defparam}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
   {$define has_interface}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
// fpc already defines i386, cpu32/CPU64 and ENDIAN_LITTLE/ENDIAN_BIG for
 all platforms
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
The earlier bit of source code then becomes:
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
type
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef HAS_DYNARRAY}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
  something = array of integer;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
  {$else
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
  something = ^integer;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}  
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code

\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef HAS_DEFAULT_PARAM}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
myfunc    = function (something:integer=50):pointer; 
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$else}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
myfunc    = function (something:integer):pointer; 
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
.
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
..
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
Uses
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef HAS_VARIANTS}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
  variants
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
,windows;
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
It is almost too trivial to mention isn't it? However it really saves enormous
 amounts of time porting packages set up like this to other compilers, custom
 runtime and classes libraries (VCL substitutes) etc etc.
 Also keep in mind that porters are often not as familiar with the package
 as you, and little things that seem trivial to you, might not be for them.
 It also helps tremendously if e.g.
 FPC has one feature in the development version, but not yet in the release
 version.
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection

\emph on
Don't
\emph default
 use {$ifdef Linux} if you mean {$ifdef Unix}
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Kylix users often put Kylix specific changes under {$ifdef linux}.
 Don't fall for this trap, since this often causes both linux kernel specific
 code and general unix functionality as trivial as backward vs forward slashes
 under the same {$ifdef linux}, which is far to generic.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Include 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|{$ifdef Linux}{$define Unix}{$endif}|
\end_layout

\end_inset

 in your central includefiles, and use Unix if it is generic.
 Better yet, use 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|{$ifdef Unix}|
\end_layout

\end_inset

 even if you don't know for sure if it is linux specific, since there really
 isn't that much linux specific in the average application source.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection

\emph on
Don't
\emph default
 assume too much about {$else} cases.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Don't use constructs like:
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef win32}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
Do_My_Windows_Thing;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$else}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
Do_My_Linux_Thing;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
This is even a bigger 
\series bold
\emph on
don't
\series default
\emph default
 than the previous one.
 What to substitute this construct with, depends on how secure you want
 it to be.
 As usual, the best way is also the most work:
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$undef platformcheck}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef Win32}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define platformcheck}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
Do_My_Window_Thing;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef Linux}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$define platformcheck}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
Do_My_Linux_Thing;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifndef Platformcheck}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$info this code must be implemented for this platform} 
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
However you would make most people already very happy if you just used:
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef Win32}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
Do_My_Window_Thing;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$ifdef Unix}
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
Do_My_Linux_Thing;
\end_layout

\begin_layout LyX-Code
{$endif}
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
This way, people porting the source to a new platform will have to quickly
 check most ifdef linux/unix clauses.
 But they'll probably have to anyway.
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection
An alternate approach
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Another possible solution is using an external preprocessor.
 Some packages tried this approach, but the problem is that building the
 source conveniently means also porting the preprocessor.
 Also, this forces Lazarus/Delphi users to the commandline.
 I don't really like this solution, but I can imagine modest use in special
 cases can have its advantages.
 Specially concerning uses clauses, which simply tend to become a mess.
 Also large bodies of EXTERNAL declarations can sometimes become much readable
 without the 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|{$ifdef win32}stdcall;{$else}cdecl;{$endif}|
\end_layout

\end_inset

 appended to every declaration.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
The limited FPC macro facility can also be used for these purposes, (by
 defining the macro's in the central includefile), but this approach has
 the fundamental problem that it is FPC only.
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Combining these two could be a step forward (use FPC macros , but expand
 them by external preprocessor for non FPC compilers).
 Since FPC runs on the most targets by far, this means the preprocessor
 only has to run on linux/i386 and win32.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Section
OS and widget set independant design.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
90% of making a certain package operating system independant lies in starting
 out with OS independance in mind, not in incorporting a few changes after
 the main development is done.
 While this sounds like a cliche, it is like with many cliche's: it is based
 on real life and generally there is a lot of truth in it.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
OS independance is not really something fundamentally different, but mainly
 a 
\series bold
state of mind.

\series default
 Separating OS (in)dependant code, widget dependant and independant code
 etc.
 What is commonly considered as OS independance is only the implementation
 of this state of mind.
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Note that Kylix is a particular problem.
 While Kylix is brilliant from the Borland perspective (keep as much win32
 Delphi code running as possible), it often conceals the real truth: Unix
 is fundamentally different from win32.
 Kylix is often also too linux specific, which is sane from a Borland perspectiv
e (they'll probably never support anything else than Linux), but might not
 be the best solution to get the most of your codebase.
 However there are two ways of looking at this: 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

the glass is half empty
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

: Linux is totally different from win32.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

the glass is half full
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

: If you want to support Linux+win32, then it is only a 
\emph on
really small
\emph default
 extra effort to support most other platforms too.
 Specially if you start with that attitude from the beginning.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
The most important thing is to isolate five basic types of code as much
 apart as possible.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
widget set dependant code.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
OS dependant code 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Architecture dependant code (processor independant)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Generic, in general platform independant code.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Compiler implementation dependant code
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Specially the second and third category can mix.
 So there can be some OS dependant code that is also architecture dependant,
 and some that is not.
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
Widget
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

set
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

dependant This class of code is the easiest type to define: it is simply
 code that depends on widget set.
 In other words, GUI code, code that uses X11, QT, GTK, win32 GDI or Aqua,
 directly or indirectly.
 There is a slight gotcha though, code depending on unit FORMS is usually
 considered GUI code even if it only uses allocatehwnd or the application
 object, since unit forms is the core of the GUI part of the VCL.
 Also, some widgetsets (Win32, Aqua) are tied to one platform and one architectu
re in practice, and some OS dependant entanglement might be hard to avoid
 in these cases.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
OS
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

dependant
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

code OS dependant code simply uses OS dependant features.
 So unit Windows, ActiveX (the whole WinApi set), Kylix unit Libc etc.
 However there are gradations when you think of Operating systems in terms
 of related families.
 A feature might not be unique for one operating system alone, but for a
 whole group.
 The picture below should illustrate this a bit.
 Specially the difference between Unix and Linux is a mean one, as already
 discussed.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
\begin_inset Graphics
	filename ostree2.png
	scale 30

\end_inset


\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
The picture should be read from top to bottom; POSIX systems have something
 in common, UNIX systems have a bit more in common, BSDs have even more
 in common etc.
 (for the upper levels think about having driveletters or not, forward or
 backward directory separator, case sensitive/insensitive/preserving filesystem
 level etc.
 This is partially what makes Windows and Dos similar) The picture is not
 really historically correct, but is only meant as the illustration of a
 possible classification of platforms from a programming perspective.
 The picture is a gross simplification, and just to give a rough idea, and
 to show that families (
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

Unix
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

 or 
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

Windows
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

) are quite complex internally, listing only platforms that are either FPC
 targets or of general interest.
 Also the versioning is way more complex than shown above.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
One can also imagine GUI widgetset as an added dimension perpendicular to
 the plane of the above picture.
 This is not just for Linux (X11,GTK,QT,WxWidgets etc), but also for e.g.
 OS X (Carbon, COCOA), .NET (Winforms 1.x, 2.x and WPF), Win32/64 ( win32 native
 (GDI), MFC).
\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
Architecture
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

dependant
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

code is processor dependant code.
 Usually assembler, but there are differences between processors that affect
 the pascal code too:
\end_layout

\begin_deeper
\begin_layout Itemize
endianness (byte ordering, are values stored with the byte with the highest
 value first, or not)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
32-bit vs 64-bit architecture (pointers become 64-bit, and might not fit
 a simple (long) integer anymore, record/structure sizes change)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
alignment requirements (structures/record size change)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
calling convention (not all calling conventions are available for all processors
 and compilers)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
size of e.g.
 floating point registers determines which floating point types have decent
 performance, and how wide they are.
 Specifically 
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

extended
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

 can be 64,80 or 128 bits.
 Avoid COMP as the plague, it is too intel specific, and doesn't have much
 advantages, use int64 as much as possible.
\end_layout

\end_deeper
\begin_layout Description
Generic
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

code is code that isn't really dependant on the OS and doesn't heavily depends
 on architecture.
 This doesn't mean it doesn't do any I/O at all, but more that all performed
 I/O is done via OS independant units (think system,sysutils,classes)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
Compiler
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

dependant
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

code This relatively small class consists of code that depends on compiler
 internals.
 Typical examples are directly accessing the VMT, or assuming too much about
 the size of a set, calling conventions and exploiting knowledge about the
 binary format of .EXE files (lowlevel RTTI (introspection), accessing debug
 metadata and/or sections)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection
Directory structure.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Besides conditional compilation, includefiles can also help sorting out
 the complexity of code with different portability aspects.
 By simply keeping OS or architecture specific code in a separate directory,
 selection of the right piece of code is then as easy as making sure the
 right directories are included while building.
 This can reduce complexity and amount of ifdefs somewhat.
 The main problem of this approach is that the way a project is built is
 not standarized.
 FPC typically uses GNU Makefiles (though some external projects use scripts/bat
ch files), while Delphi has a build system depending on all kinds of project
 and configuration files.
 (which is usually horribly version, installation and OS dependant)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsubsection
FPC RTL/packages directory structure
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
An example of how to organize this is the FPC directory structure used in
 the RTL and packages, that looks like this ($OS is the OS we compile for,
 $CPU the architecture):
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
<pachagename>/$OS (OS dependant stuff goes here)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
<packagename/$OS/$CPU (OS and arch dependanty stuff.
 Startup code, syscalls, asm interfacing with the OS etc)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
<packagename>/$CPU (CPU specific, but not OS specific, math stuff, strings
 and language helpers mainly)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
<packagename>/inc (general totally independant include directory.
 Both .inc as units)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
<packagename>/unix (general shared unix code.
 Usually 90% of all code for Linux/FreeBSD/ OS X is Unix generic when properly
 typed and parameterised)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
<packagename>/bsd (if it is a codebase with a lot of OS dependancies, it
 is even worthwhile to factor out common BSD code, with 4-5 BSD supported)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
One can probably easily imagine adding directories for widgetsets (win32,
 gtk, qt on a basic level, or CLX, VCL, LCL on a higher level) too.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
This scheme works very well for libraries that wrap OS dependant functionality
 in an OS independant way.
 The avg app can probably do with a subset of these, depending on its nature.
 (e.g.
 win32/, unix/, vcl/, clx/ and lcl/).
 Small differences can better be IFDEFed, but try to do this as general
 as possible.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Section
Project building
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
As said earlier, the exact build process varies significantly with the compiler,
 Delphi integrates package/project support in the IDE and uses several files
 for this, both global (think package registry) and project specific.
 Worse, these systems are not 100% the same amongst versions.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
FPC uses a separate program, GNU Make, and uses a template Makefile.fpc in
 each build directory that is expanded to the real Makefile by the generator
 program fpcmake.
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
At the current time, I'm not aware of efforts to make project building (more)
 compiler independant.
 There are two possible approaches:
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Create a new package information fileformat, and generate both package files
 from it.
 (probably D4+ only, since older version have binary package formats)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Try to write converters (makefile.fpc to .dpk and vice versa)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Both are not trivial, however can be simplified considerably by moving as
 much directives as possible to the source.
 (and of course to the central include file would be best:-) However this
 is a rough idea, I'd need to know the build system of Delphi much more
 intimately before pursuing something like this.
 Waiting till FPC has packages would be wise also, to avoid having to rework
 the system too soon.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Section
Missing/buggy language features in FPC 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
General problems, or language syntax for which bugs have been reported,
 but the exact status is not known.
 These are currently for all known versions:
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
@@xx_is
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

not
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

supported Procvars using double 
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

at
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

 sign are not yet supported in 1.9.2 (I believe now it is supported)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
The exact state of the 
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

reintroduce
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

 support is not known.
 (it's ok, it only suppressed a warning)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Packages are still missing (see http://wiki.freepascal.org/packages 
\begin_inset Flex URL
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout

http://wiki.freepascal.org/packages
\end_layout

\end_inset

 for an overview.
 Shared linking beyond C level in general is poor.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
In general, FPC is mostly on D7 language level with operator overloading
 and inline added from later versions.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection
FPC 2.0.x
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate

\series bold
Missing
\series default
 
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

implements
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

 functionality (delegation)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate

\series bold
Missing
\series default
 packages
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate

\series bold
Missing
\series default
 dispinterfaces and dispid
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate

\series bold
Missing
\series default
 custom variants
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Widestrings and variants need more testing.
 Widestrings are still missing a lot of RTL routines.
 Some of the variant wrapper classes are also missed.
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Currency type used to be on the 
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

buggy
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

 list too.
 However there has been quite some work on this recently, so it could be
 ok.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection
FPC 2.2.x 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Dispinterfaces and dispid are mostly working.
 (or at least parsed correctly)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Initial generics support (own syntax, FPC started on this pre Tiburon) that
 somewhat matured during the 2.2.x cycle.
 Enough to have e.g.
 generic container types, but not for advanced generic programming.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
automated modifier is still missing?
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection
FPC 2.3.x
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Generics further improved
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
TUnicodeString as a basis for Tiburon unicode string support has been started.
 It works initially, but is currently internally slightly different from
 Tiburon, which makes the Tiburon codepage functionality of Ansistring hard
 to implement.
 Will probably changed, but development stalled.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Dynamic dispatch, customvariants and olevariant improving.
 Implements delegation still support not entirely complete.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Delegation is starting to work but several often used constructs are not
 implemented yet.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Automated modifier is still missing?
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection
FPC 2.4.x
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
Resources more Delphi like
\end_layout

\begin_layout Enumerate
(from 2.4.2) some D2006 features like for..in added
\end_layout

\begin_layout Section
Kylix/Libc unit issues
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
The problem with Kylix is that it is more designed to make recompiling (Win32)
 Delphi apps for Linux easy than to provide a platform to do generic Unix
 development.
 From Borlands perspective, this makes sense, but using Kylix-specific units
 (mainly unit libc) without wrapper seriously decreases portability.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Unit libc is a direct translation of the libc headers for modern Linux/i386
 installations, and thus a lot of unit libc functionality is Linux only,
 or reveals linux specific unneeded details.
 There is no attempt at cleaning up the interface presented to the end user.
 While in theory one could try to emulate certain linux specific calls,
 the libc-interface was considered too inheritly linux specific and unclean
 that it was decided to only support unit libc as 
\emph on
legacy
\emph default
 unit on Linux/i386.
 This was partially also to avoid the libc unit becoming Kylix uncompatible
 in many very small ways.
 Alternatively the old FPC Unix rtl was modernized into something better
 portable for all Unixy ports.
 (see the unixrtl.pdf document)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
The best way to deal with Kylix libc unit dependancies are:
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
Minimize any use of unit libc if possible (e.g.
 use SysUtils unit and other such units as much as possible).
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
It is often better to create a handful of compatible wrapper units for Kylix
 then the other way around to try to port the Kylix libc units to FPC.
 So creating a baseunix, termio, dynlibs and users wrappers units for Kylix
 can often make your source management easier, and keep unnecessary ifdefs
 from the main source.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
If for some odd ball reason you have to use libc, try to keep the libc unit
 dependancy localised to as little units as possible.
 E.g.
 use a wrapper if you want to use stat64 or so.
 <functionname>64 functions are a linuxism (and i386 even)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
Please don't ask to port libc to other targets than linux/i386.
 
\series bold
It won't happen
\series default
.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
Be very strict about Unix typing, don't assume too much about the sizes
 of Unix types.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
Do not directly use the dynamic library functions of unit Libc.
 Always employ a wrapper, preferably modelled or equal to FPC's dynlibs
 unit (which emerged after problems with Jedi SDL related to dyn loading)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
Do not use the user/group/password functions in unit libc, use the (2.2.2+)
 package users instead.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
Do not use iconv functions from libc, but use 
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

iconvenc
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset

 package (2.2.3+)
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
Avoid using messaging systems on *nix.
 While they may work fine on one type, it is nearly impossible to write
 generic *nix code with it.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
In general try to avoid exploiting special Linux features to emulate windows
 behaviour.
 Make sure the functionality is portable first (e.g.
 check the Open Group site) , and if you need it despite portability concerns,
 encapsulate it properly.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Itemize
See also 
\begin_inset Flex URL
status open

\begin_layout Plain Layout

http://wiki.freepascal.org/libc_unit
\end_layout

\end_inset


\end_layout

\begin_layout Section
Misc problems
\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
Comments
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

before
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

{$mode
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

Delphi}
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

must
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

be
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

balanced Only a 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|{$mode Delphi|
\end_layout

\end_inset

 puts FPC in Delphi mode.
 So any comments before this command (or the includefile that contains it)
 must be balanced, like in TP.
 This is a 
\series bold
very
\series default
 common problem.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
The
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

exact
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

size
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

that
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

a
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

set
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

occupies
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

can
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

be
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

different FPC currently only supports sets with size 4 and 32 bytes.
 So everything smaller than 33 elements is 4 bytes in size, 33-256 elements
 is 32 bytes in size.
 Also the elements are always counted starting from ordinal value zero.
 In other words, a 
\begin_inset ERT
status collapsed

\begin_layout Plain Layout


\backslash
verb|set of 20..40|
\end_layout

\end_inset

 counts as 41 elements (0..40), even though only 21 (20..40) are used.
 
\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
Wintypes,
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

Winprocs These old Delphi 1 units can still be used in Delphi.
 The project file in Delphi aliases these to unit windows.
 However FPC doesn't have this (aliasing) feature, and doesn't have a project
 system like this on the compiler level.
 D1 and win3.x are really too obsolete to create an ugly hack to do major
 development to support this construct.
 The best way is to always use unit Windows as much as possible, unless
 Delphi 1 compability is 
\emph on
really
\emph default
 needed (ICS is one of the few packages that still support D1), and then
 better ifdef the non D1 situation to use unit 
\begin_inset Quotes eld
\end_inset

windows
\begin_inset Quotes erd
\end_inset


\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
Avoid
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

paths
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

in
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

USES
\begin_inset space ~
\end_inset

clauses Delphi (and FPC) can use syntax like uses xxx IN ' c:
\backslash
windows
\backslash
interfaces
\backslash
sources
\backslash
include
\backslash
headers.pas'; This is a plague when porting for obvious reasons, so better
 avoid it.
 Relative paths are slightly less evil, but as a whole, packages that use
 this feature are much more costly to reorganise.
 Note that since FPC and Delphi have separate build systems above the basic
 <compiler> <file> level (Delphi with .dpk, FPC using gmake to simplify the
 buildprocess of large pkgs).
 Often the buildprocess inner workings are entangled with the directory
 structure.
 Because of this, the buildprocess always needs some work, and hardcoded
 paths add an unnecessary complication to deal with.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Description
Filenames The best is to keep filenames lowercase.
 This because on case sensitive filesystems, Free Pascal also checks the
 all-lowercase name, and you don't need to synchronize casing in all uses
 clauses to match the filename.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Subsection
Be very picky about what to put in the USES statement
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Compared to the good ole Turbo Pascal days, the USES statements in publically
 available Delphi code are often not cleaned up.
 Units are USEd that aren't used (:-)), and that has the potential to unnecessar
y complicate porting.
 If the unit never used at all, it may even increase your .exe size unnecessarily
, because (at least AFAIK) unit initialization/finalization code is always
 run, and never eliminated by smartlinking.
 Typically when porting problems of this type arise, the units in questions
 are winapi units, or VCL units like Graphics.
 See also the section about Kylix.
\end_layout

\begin_layout Standard
Sometimes it is easier to put a few type aliases in some central unit, then
 conditionally import a certain unit everywhere.
\end_layout

\end_body
\end_document
