Gpc October 2001

gpc@gnu.de

45 participants
80 discussions

gpc bug found
by Andrew Makhorin 17 Oct '01

17 Oct '01

Hi, It seems I found a bug in gpc. If I try compiling a Pascal program (see the attachment), something like this appears: /tmp/cc4P4VfS.s: Assembler messages: /tmp/cc4P4VfS.s:17865: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `mov' I use Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 and gpc version 19991030 on Intel PC. Andrew Makhorin

3 2

question on gcc version
by Oldham, Adam 17 Oct '01

17 Oct '01

Hello, I have been off the list for a few months. But had a quick question that I am sure has been asked by now. Is GPC compatible with gcc 2.96 or 3.0? Or must I downgrade to gcc 2.95.x to get it to compile correctly? Also, is there a web site that contains a list of archived post to the list? Thanks, Adam ----------------------------------------------------------------------- C. Adam Oldham Marconi Commerce Systems Inc. Software Engineer 7300 West Friendly Ave. adam.oldham(a)marconi.com Greensboro, NC 27420-2087 Phone : 336.547.5952 Fax : 336.547.5079 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This document contains confidential information of Marconi Commerce Systems Inc. In consideration of the receipt of this document, the recipient agrees not to reproduce, copy, use or transmit this document and/or the information contained herein, in whole or in part, or to suffer such actions by others, for any purpose except with written permission, first obtained, of Marconi Commerce Systems Inc., and further agrees to surrender the same to Marconi Commerce Systems Inc. upon demand. -----------------------------------------------------------------------

3 2

Re: standards, responses to list (was: compiler bug)
by da Silva, Joe 17 Oct '01

17 Oct '01

Well, the discussion on declaration of "output" has probably been adequately covered (the answer to which is, of course, that it's only required if standard output is used, explicitly or implicitly. Since "internal" error messages are often handled separately on many (most?) OSes, these aren't an implicit use of "standard output"). For anyone interested, declaration of "output" has two effects - it automatically declares the text file variable "output" and it issues a "rewrite" (according to Kathleen and Niklaus;-). As for "out-of-order declarations", these ARE permitted by ISO standard ISO-10206 (aka. Extended Pascal). BTW, I too, disagree with the way that responses to list messages are normally directed to the originator, rather than the list. Maybe if we all share this opinion, we can persuade whoever is responsible to change this? Joe. > -----Original Message----- > From: CBFalconer [SMTP:cbfalconer@yahoo.com] > Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2001 4:38 AM > To: J. David Bryan; gpc mail-list > Subject: Re: compiler bug > > "J. David Bryan" wrote: > > > > On 11 Oct 2001, at 18:59, CBFalconer wrote: > > > ... snip ... > > > > I believe that generally it would be most helpful to the GPC maintainers > if > > you could separate into the smallest complete programs each of the > missed > > syntax errors you noted (i.e., create the smallest possible test case > for > > each reported problem). For example, the first error appears to be > caused > > by an out-of-order declaration, so: > > > > program t1; > > > > procedure p; > > begin > > end; > > > > var x: integer; > > > > begin > > end. > > > > ...should do it. Your help in improving the quality of GPC will be > > appreciated. > > Your sample above has two faults. It should specify at least > (output) in the command line, and it has the illegal declaration > portion. Both of which are minor, but contrary to strict > standards. PascalP has a flag to allow some of the out-of-order > declarations. So: > ------ snip ------

4 3

Re: compiler bug
by da Silva, Joe 17 Oct '01

17 Oct '01

Please see below ... Joe. > -----Original Message----- > From: Frank Heckenbach [SMTP:frank@g-n-u.de] > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 9:50 AM > To: cbfalconer(a)worldnet.att.net; gpc(a)gnu.de > Subject: Re: compiler bug > > I'm replying to several mails at once ... > ------ snip ------ > CBFalconer wrote: > ------ snip ------ > > PROGRAM testnn1; > > > > BEGIN > > writeln('Testnn fails to detect lack of output file parameter'); > > (* here is needed a way to return a status *) > > (* which is missing from ISO Pascal *) > > (* PascalP uses "terminate(integer)" extension *) > > END. > > This produces a warning with `gpc --standard-pascal'. If you want it > to be an error, add `-Werror'. > [Joe da Silva] Clearly, "output" IS being used by this program, so the fact that it's missing as a parameter of the program, is clearly an error (unless of course, you are compiling to the Borland dialect). If GPC can deal with this (which AFAIK it can), then it's a "non-fatal" error. IMHO, a warning should result only when something is "suspicious", rather than when something is clearly erroneous, as in this example. > > PROGRAM testnn2(output); > > > > CONST > > a = 1; > > > > TYPE > > b = integer; > > > > CONST > > c = 2; > > > > BEGIN > > writeln('Failure to detect misordered declarations'); > > END. > > I'm putting it in the test suite (chuck1.pas), so we can fix it > sometime. (Though I must admit that the priority isn't very high, at > least for me, since I don't program in plain SP myself, and see such > restrictions as rather limiting -- mixing declaration blocks allows > for more "topic oriented" structuring. But, of course, to be really > conformant, GPC must detect this in the future.) > [Joe da Silva] What do you consider "Standard"??? As far as I'm concerned, ISO-10206 is the standard to which GPC aspires, so why should GPC regard the above as an error, when this is clearly permitted by ISO-10206. IMHO, ISO-7185 should not be regarded as if it's the one and only Pascal standard. Prospero call this version of the language "Classic Pascal", to distinguish it from "Extended Pascal". I like that idea. I don't think it helps Pascal's image to always refer to ISO-7185 as THE Pascal standard, since this gives the impression of a very restricted and limited language, which is not something that Pascal deserves. I think we should promote the ISO-10206 standard, not pretend there is only one Pascal standard. (Rant over ;-)

5 8

Re: compiler bug
by da Silva, Joe 17 Oct '01

17 Oct '01

Please see below ... Joe. > -----Original Message----- > From: CBFalconer [SMTP:cbfalconer@yahoo.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 9:03 AM > To: gpc mail-list > Subject: Re: compiler bug > ------ snip ------ > What is the status of the Extended Pascal (10206) standard? Is it > an official standard, or in the proposed state. I just downloaded > [Joe da Silva] It's official, of course, since 1991 (one year after ISO-7185). If you want to actually buy an official copy, see your local standards supplier (note that many countries have a "local" version of this standard, eg. in Australia, it's AS-3981). > the postscript version, and that is a monster to handle on this > machine. Ghostview takes forever, can't backup, etc. Does anyone > have a version converted to text? > > -- > Chuck F (cbfalconer(a)yahoo.com) (cbfalconer(a)XXXXworldnet.att.net) > Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems. > (Remove "XXXX" from reply address. yahoo works unmodified) > mailto:uce@ftc.gov (for spambots to harvest) > >

1 0

Obscure error message
by Theo Carr-Brion 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

Compiling some of our software with gpc 20010924 I get the following error message: label `10' used before containing binding contour Can anyone explain to me what it means, please? The code is too complicated to reproduce and any simple examples don't have the problem. The code is used on other pascal compilers that do not support Exit so we have a label as the last line in the procedure and use Goto where the Exit would be. The code compiles on Borland pascal and the other compilers that we use. Theo Carr-Brion

2 1

Re: compiler bug
by da Silva, Joe 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

ISO-10206 is the Extended Pascal Standard, which is a "fully compatible superset" of the ISO-7185 standard (aka. "Classic Pascal"). You can obtain a Postscript version for A4 page size at : http://jds-freeware.hypermart.net/iso10206.zip You can obtain a Postscript version for USL page size at : http://www.employees.org/~samiam/iso10206.ps You can also obtain these and ISO-7185 somewhere on DEC's European FTP server (don't have the URL handy). You can also get a PDF formatted version (page size?) at : http://www.pascal-central.com/docs/iso10206.pdf (The PDF conversion seems to result in a font which is not very crisp, but you may find this format more convenient.) Some additional information seems to be available here : http://www.pluennecke.de/DOWNLOAD/dnld.htm (Haven't checked this out yet, may or may not be associated with Prospero Software.) Joe. > -----Original Message----- > From: CBFalconer [SMTP:cbfalconer@yahoo.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 3:30 PM > To: gpc mail-list > Subject: Re: compiler bug > ------ snip ------ > What is ISO-10206, and where is it available? > > At the same time, GPC should be able to check various portability > levels. If the source conforms to a standard, it is compilable > under systems that support that standard. If we can't tell it > conforms, we can't very well put a stamp on it. > > -- > Chuck F (cbfalconer(a)yahoo.com) (cbfalconer(a)XXXXworldnet.att.net) > Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems. > (Remove "XXXX" from reply address. yahoo works unmodified) > mailto:uce@ftc.gov (for spambots to harvest) > >

1 0

Re: Darwin port possible?
by da Silva, Joe 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

>From previous discussions, GPC is not compatible with GCC 3.0, the latest suitable GCC version is 2.95.3. However, I understand that the long term plan is to make GPC compatible with the current version of GCC, so perhaps there's hope ... BTW, I don't know the issues involved with this version incompatibility, nor the time-frame for aligning the GPC and GCC codes, perhaps someone else can comment? Joe. > -----Original Message----- > From: strobe anarkhos [SMTP:anarkhos@mac.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 7:13 AM > To: pascal.pignard > Cc: gpc(a)gnu.de > Subject: Re: Darwin port possible? > > FYI: There is a gcc 3.0 port on the Darwin CVS in /cvs/Commands/GNU/gcc/

1 0

Darwin port possible?
by strobe anarkhos 15 Oct '01

15 Oct '01

Is this project still alive? I'd like to know if anybody has tried porting gpc to Darwin PPC. Mac OS X has a very large and extensive pascal library called Carbon. It's written in C but all functions are extern pascal. Currently pascal programmers wanting to write applications for OS X have to use an old version of Code Warrior in MacOS and compile a PEF executable. This situation isn't very convenient to say the least. C/C++ programmers can use gcc to compile Mach-O executables, the native binary format for OS X. (pascal used to be the native programming language for MacOS, but has fallen in favor of C using extern pascal functions and pascal strings. Carbon is a huge library consisting of nearly all APIs accumulated over the decades, and some which were not included have 3rd party implementations like QD3D. Quite possibly this is the largest and most complete set of APIs with pascal interfaces) As an added benefit it should be possible to adapt Project Builder, the free OS X IDE, for compiling pascal applications. It's already been adapted to compile C++, Java and AppleScript. It already uses gdb for ObjC/C/C++ debugging. Perhaps the old MacApp Object Pascal framework can be revived, if gpc was ported. There is certainly potential for a pascal renaissance given a free compiler coupled with this extensive pascal-based API. I'm not an expert in gcc internals so I'm not sure if I could do it myself.

2 6

array indexes
by Adam Naumowicz 15 Oct '01

15 Oct '01

Hello, I would like to know what is the reason why GPC complains about type mismatch compiling lines like below: ....... var a:array[0..10] of integer; function at(const index:integer):integer; begin at:=a[index]; end; ....... It seems to me, that there is a too rigid type checking in this matter. Why are constants not allowed here ? Regards, Adam Naumowicz -------------------------------------- WWW: http://math.uwb.edu.pl/~adamn/ --------------------------------------

7 10

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

Gpc October 2001