Gpc November 2001

gpc@gnu.de

28 participants
70 discussions

StringUtils, FileUtils
by Frank Heckenbach 31 May '02

31 May '02

Hi, in the current GPC version, I've included a StringUtils unit for general string handling routines (on a higher level than the built-in and RTS routines). Up to now, it only contains routines for a string hash table, but I'm planning to add some more routines. Perhaps some of you also have some routines to contribute (or features to request). Conditions for inclusion into this unit should be, IMHO: - Generally useful (not meant specifically for a certain program or something), - self-contained (not relying on an external library etc.), - new functionality compared to the existing routines (whereas the same or similar functionality under a different interface for compatibility purposes should go into other units, like GPCUtil for compatibility to `Turbo Power' units), - and, of course, compilable with the current GPC version, portable, bug-free, etc. ;-) The same goes for the FileUtils unit which has been there for some months already. Frank -- Frank Heckenbach, frank(a)g-n-u.de, http://fjf.gnu.de/ GPC To-Do list, latest features, fixed bugs: http://agnes.dida.physik.uni-essen.de/~gnu-pascal/todo.html

2 10

Files
by berend＠beard.nest.nl 01 Feb '02

01 Feb '02

* Moved (from: gpc) by Berend de Boer using timEd 1.10.b3+. Peter Gerwinski wrote in a message to Berend de Boer: PG> I tried to use Extended Pascal "binding" to assign a file PG> variable to an external -- existing -- file. I just copied PG> the "Assign" pro- cedure by Berend as published in PG> borland2ep.doc. It does not always work: I often get a PG> runtime error saying that the file did not exist. If you can repeat it, compile with another Extended Pascal compiler, for example Prospero's one. If that fails too, there is really something wrong with the code. But I suspect gpc. You're using which OS? Groetjes, Berend (-: fido: 2:281/527.23 email: berend(a)beard.nest.nl

4 3

operators pow and **
by Maurice Lombardi 01 Feb '02

01 Feb '02

Hi all, It seems that operators pow and ** cannot be redefined in gpc. Is that expected ? I work with djgpp / w98 dos box (should be irrelevant I think) Thanks Maurice -- Maurice Lombardi Laboratoire de Spectrometrie Physique, Universite Joseph Fourier de Grenoble, BP87 38402 Saint Martin d'Heres Cedex FRANCE Tel: 33 (0)4 76 51 47 51 Fax: 33 (0)4 76 51 45 44 mailto:Maurice.Lombardi@ujf-grenoble.fr

4 4

New GDB version 5.1 available
by Pierre Muller 19 Dec '01

19 Dec '01

This is just to inform people that GDB 5.1 was released. http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-announce/2001/msg00010.html Extract of the annoucement of particular interest for gpc and fpc-pascal mailing lists : ........................ What has changed in GDB? *** Changes in GDB 5.1: ........................ * Support for debugging Pascal programs. GDB now includes support for debugging Pascal programs. The following main features are supported: - Pascal-specific data types such as sets; - automatic recognition of Pascal sources based on file-name extension; - Pascal-style display of data types, variables, and functions; - a Pascal expression parser. However, some important features are not yet supported. - Pascal string operations are not supported at all; - there are some problems with boolean types; - Pascal type hexadecimal constants are not supported because they conflict with the internal variables format; - support for Pascal objects and classes is not full yet; - unlike Pascal, GDB is case-sensitive for symbol names. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>< The pascal language support is essentially my work, but it is still far from complete and far from perfect. One of the latest patch applied should allow to get a nice representation of GPC strings. Please don't hesitate to report problems about pascal support .... Two reminders: -- if you really can't do what you used to do anymore with GDB, try simply to set the language to C with (gdb) set langugage c and try again if it works better. Don't forget that if you are in pascal language, pascal syntax must be used: so to change the value of a variable 'x' in the program, you will need to use (gdb) set x := 5 instead of (gdb) set x = 5 for older GDB version. In the hope that these changes will be useful for the pascal community. Pierre Muller Institut Charles Sadron 6,rue Boussingault F 67083 STRASBOURG CEDEX (France) mailto:muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr Phone : (33)-3-88-41-40-07 Fax : (33)-3-88-41-40-99

6 8

Change in packing
by Martin Liddle 08 Dec '01

08 Dec '01

Having got 20011123 to compile, I found three differences in the compiler from our previous gpc version 20010604. It objected in two different units to code using a GOTO with the error message: " Label '1' used before containing binding contour'. The code looks correct and compiles and executes properly with the previous version. Is this a known problem as it looks as though it should be fairly easy to produce a test case if required. However the problem is easily worked around. Secondly it picked up a number of occurrences of incorrect code of the form St[9]:=Chr(65)+Random(26) that had been accepted by the previous version; so that is progress. My main problem is that the packing of records appears to have changed. For instance a record of the form TCompR=Packed Record AName:String(49); AClass:1..40; Awel:Set of 1..120; RLate,RTime:Integer; End; has the same size as previously (as reported by sizeof) but when using this record to read from a file written by code compiled with our previous version of the compiler gives nonsense values for AClass and Awel. I can work around this particular problem by changing the definition of AClass to Byte but sadly our code has a great many packed records (because it was originally written a long time ago when storage was more precious) but making all the files backwards compatible is not going to be trivial. So two questions: Is there any switch that will restore the previous packing behaviour? Assuming there is not, could someone explain in more detail what has changed and what are the rules governing packing so that I can work out how to redefine each of the affected records. -- Martin Liddle, Tynemouth Computer Services, 27 Garforth Close, Cramlington, Northumberland, England, NE23 6EW. Phone: 01670-712624. Fax: 01670-717324. Web site: <http://www.tynecomp.co.uk>.

3 11

Problem building gpc-20011123
by Martin Liddle 03 Dec '01

03 Dec '01

I am trying to build gpc-20011123 based on gcc-2.95.2 under Red Hat Linux 7.2. I have done this before with earlier versions of gpc but on this occasion configure is stopping when applying the patch to gcc with the message: "Missing header for unified diff at line 449 of patch. The text leading up to this was |--- expr.c.orig Sun Nov 18 00:05:40 2001 Any clues as what the problem is ? -- Martin Liddle, Tynemouth Computer Services, 27 Garforth Close, Cramlington, Northumberland, England, NE23 6EW. Phone: 01670-712624. Fax: 01670-717324. Web site: <http://www.tynecomp.co.uk>.

3 4

GPC Keywords/Reserved Words
by Gloria, Jing 01 Dec '01

01 Dec '01

Pls advise if there is a way to make GPC accept a field name in a RECORD or variable name and that field name or variable name is a reserved or key word in GPC. I am porting software from SPARC SunOS (using SUN PASCAL compiler) to INTEL Solaris 7 (using GPC). For example : EXAMPLE A: PROCEDURE Blkkut; VAR Trow, Tline_nbr, Tcnt :INTEGER; Tptr :Parm_ptr; Tmp_erlin :Er_typ; View :BOOLEAN; Repos :INTEGER; BEGIN (* Blkkut *) IF Slct_flg THEN BEGIN View := FALSE; Blkcopy(View); <<< this is line 349; View is a GPC reserved word. IF NOT Spare_buffer_used THEN I get the following errors during compile: Shared_tpl/Mprocsrc/blockcmd.p: In procedure `Blkkut': Shared_tpl/Mprocsrc/blockcmd.p:349: parse error before `View' Shared_tpl/Mprocsrc/blockcmd.p:349: missing `)' Shared_tpl/Mprocsrc/blockcmd.p:349: too few arguments to function `Blkcopy' Shared_tpl/Mprocsrc/blockcmd.p:349: parse error before `)' EXAMPLE B: Sortmask_rec = PACKED RECORD Bin_nbr :Int8; Class :Class_typ; <<< line 226 Class is a GPC reserve word. Any :BOOLEAN; Display_ch :Displ_char; Socket_quality_delta :INT16; Test_Sum :INT16; Test_List :PACKED ARRAY[1..Maximum_tests] of INT16; END; Error messages during compile. In file included from Shared_tpl/Inc/tplmain.typ:38, from Shared_tpl/Mprocsrc/blockcmd.p:67: Dependent/Inc/misc.typ:226: parse error before `Class' Dependent/Inc/misc.typ:226: extra semicolon I am using gpc version 20010623, based on 2.95.2 19991024 (release) and I use only -O and --no-mixed-comments options when calling gpc. Thanks in advance for any assistance. Jing Gloria Texas Instruments

4 6

Bug: error in writeln output
by Ian Thurlbeck 30 Nov '01

30 Nov '01

Dear All I've found a simple case of a bug in writeln(): program sumbug(input,output); begin writeln(10.0*0.01); writeln(100.0*0.001); writeln(1.0*0.1); end. All should print 0.1 I guess, but I get: % ./bug :.000000000000000e-02 :.000000000000000e-02 1.000000000000000e-01 Interestingly ':' is the next character after '9' in the ASCII table, so it appears to be trying to print out the ASCII chacter for '10' (ten). 10.0e-02 is 0.1 after all ! This happens with the latest gpc-20011123 and also gpc-20010512 (that's all I've tested). Many thanks Ian -- Ian Thurlbeck http://www.stams.strath.ac.uk/ Statistics and Modelling Science, University of Strathclyde Livingstone Tower, 26 Richmond Street, Glasgow, UK, G1 1XH Tel: +44 (0)141 548 3667 Fax: +44 (0)141 552 2079

3 2

GPC/Solaris2.7 installation problem
by Mirsad Todorovac 30 Nov '01

30 Nov '01

Hi, all! On sparc-sun-solaris2.7, with gpc-20011123 / gcc-2.95.3 I've had the problem that patching failed (in line 447 of diff file). The problem proved to be the following: I've had /usr/bin{/patch} in path before /usr/local/bin{/patch} ; and it appears that Sun's original patch utility doesn't understand GPC's .diff format. I can't tell for sure, but it seems to me that this problem didn't occur with gpc-20010924 / gcc-2.95.2 ??? (Or I would remember it I guess). After linking /usr/local/bin/patch to ~/bin (which *was* in path before /usr/bin) everything went fine - but for a moment I was really confused. Mirsad -- This message has been made up using recycled ideas and language constructs. No plant or animal has been injured in process of making this message.

2 1

Re: dostest crash with djgpp
by Maurice Lombardi 30 Nov '01

30 Nov '01

Frank Heckenbach wrote: >>After that there is no more error, and I have uploaded the resulting bin to agnes. >> > > I just discovered a pretty stupid bug I made recently. Though the > fix will be uploaded soon via Peter as usual, I'm sending it to you > already because you might want to rebuild the binary before too many > people get it. > > Frank Done. It is uploaded to agnes as gpc-20011130-gcc-2953.i586-pc-msdosdjgpp.zip and available as usual under the link ftp://agnes.dida.physik.uni-essen.de/home/maurice/gpc2953b.zip Maurice -- Maurice Lombardi Laboratoire de Spectrometrie Physique, Universite Joseph Fourier de Grenoble, BP87 38402 Saint Martin d'Heres Cedex FRANCE Tel: 33 (0)4 76 51 47 51 Fax: 33 (0)4 76 63 54 95 mailto:Maurice.Lombardi@ujf-grenoble.fr

1 0

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 November 2001