upvote
Amusingly, Free Vision (the Free Pascal version of Turbo Vision) is based on a manual translation of the C++ version because that was released on public domain at some point and someone ported it back from C++ to Object/Free Pascal.
reply
Interesting. If I remember correctly the source code was available (need to check my old disks), however most likely the licence would forbid that anyway.
reply
IIRC Borland released the C++ version specifically as PD later on their FTP server, it isn't based on the version from Turbo C++ physical releases. The history is (very briefly) mentioned in the Free Vision wiki page at the FPC wiki[0] (note that the wiki needs cleanup, e.g. it mentions 64bit clean support as a todo item but FV has been 64bit clean for a very long time now). It also mentions that somewhere between the C++ version and the Pascal conversion, TV/FV was converted to use graphics instead of text mode and it was ported back to text mode -- considering all the conversions, i'm surprised the API remained largely the same so that even now the best way to learn Free Vision is to read Turbo Vision docs/tutorials/books :-P.

[0] https://wiki.freepascal.org/Free_Vision

reply
I see, thanks for the clarification.
reply
OWL was really ahead of its time.
reply
Yeah, besides the current offerings from VCL and FireMonkey, only Qt compares to it in terms of existing C++ frameworks.

History rumor hill goes that originally MFC was just as high level, the origin of Afx prefix, however internal teams were opposed to it and hence how MFC became a very thin layer over Win32.

History repeated itself with C++/CX, finally Microsoft had something comparable to C++ Builder, and internal teams weren't happy until they sabotaged the whole effort with C++/WinRT. Now outside Windows team no one cares.

The development experience with OWL, on Windows 3.1 was great, I never bothered with raw Win16 or Win32 other that learning the foundations, or adding support for missing capabilities, at the TP, Delphi, C++ frameworks.

reply