Graph.tpu

What are the circumstances for you needing it?  It comes with Turbo Pascal 7.0.  Did your original get corrupted?  If this is the case, I'm pretty sure it would be OK to send you a copy.

yes, it is corrupted, can you give me a copy?

thanks in advance

Why do you want to use the graph.tpu anyways .. it sucks .. it is so slooooow  cause doing multiple cals to int 0x10 just write your own e.g. use Vesa if you want to use higher modes than 320x200 and by using the Linear Frame buffer you can get excelent performance speed or just to use 320x200 quick mode you can use inline asm ... btw download yourself the 32-bit Pascal which is for free and then you don't have the problem of the 640k barrier and when you feel realy going to the side of power get djgpp which is a free c/c++ compiler .. which btw quake was written in ;-)

cheerio

zeroimpact, what is the website os pascal 32 bit

http://www.brain.uni-freiburg.de/~klaus/fpc/

yeah, graph.tpu is slow, but it is not necessarily true that c is faster than pascal!!

Actually ansi C is many times slower than pascal.
C always compiles and links all the #include files, while Pascal only compiles and links the variables that are in units that your program uses, and that are actually used by programs...

IE :
If in C you do #include <stdio.h>, when you compile the program its as if the whole STDIO.H source code has been pasted in your own, while if in pascal you do :

uses crt;
begin
  readkey;
end.

When compiled the program will only paste the readkey function to the code, not taking extra space and compilation time.

Phoenix your comment is tottaly invalid in the sence of the way you compile , yes if you do not put in the compiling optemizations flags in you will get most off the code pasted in as you say but ( for debugging purposes ) but using optemization flags only the needed stuff will be compiled in. But saying that C is slower than pascal just because of that is not true that only enlarges the file size of your exe or obj ... I was actually pointing to the fact that the graph.tpu was slow and not the compiler because of the graph tpu doing a lot of calls to int 0x10 thus in pascal you can get high frame rates by using direct memory writes to the video card or inline asm or even external asm objects.

The only thing is with C is that you have more flexibility to do things , but if you code bad then well c is not going to seem much better ... it's like saying we can write everything in asm .. because asm is fast ... but if you code bad then your asm will sometimes be slower than your c or even well optemized pascal code. for ex a putpixel can in 320x200 can only be optemized to a point , if you do it in c , asm or pascal and it will give the same results ...

FPK-pascal is boring : you need to change many things in your programs and compiler isn't very user-friendly

Well switch to djgpp ... it's fun ... but the thing is tp7 you sit with the boring restrictions of the 640k barrier ... which you can only allocate 64k pages .. and you are limited to your array sizes and no of arrays ..