March 2001 - Gpc

Linking units/modules
by david＠tcs01.demon.co.uk 13 Mar '01

13 Mar '01

Still continuing my migration from GPC 19991030 to GPC 20010306 ... There seems to me to be a difference in how units/modules are found at link time. With 19991030, if I had a program (prog1.p) which used unit unit1.p, the program had a 'uses unit1' in it, and my build procedure did gpc -c unit1.p on the unit, and then gpc prog1 and everything worked. With 20010306, that scheme gives me unresolved referenecs for everything that prog1 uses that is declared in unit1 and I find (having compiled unit1.p to unit1.o and unit1.gpi by gpc -c unit1.p) I have to issue the command gpc prog1.p unit1.o (Yes I know in this case I could just say gpc prog1.p unit1.p in a single command, but in reality there are many units used by many progams, so the make procedure compiles all the units to .o and .gpi files, and then compiles all the programs). This is all under Linux (Redhat 6.2). Is this the expected behaviour now? -- David James mailto:david@tcs01.demon.co.uk Special Stage Rally results archive <URL:http://www.tcs01.demon.co.uk/>

2 1

Re: GNU Pascal Anfänger
by Egbert Seibertz 13 Mar '01

13 Mar '01

On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 08:22:00AM -0000, Prof Abimbola Olowofoyeku wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 08:08:38PM -0000, Prof Abimbola Olowofoyeku > > wrote: > ... > While I can see that, from the number of German speakers > > on this list, > a German language group may be of advantage to them, the > > question >... > - but the question still remains - if a specific > > language list were to be > starited, why not others? And if not, why > > not? And if others are started, > > > > they'd have all own lists, of course! > > > > > who will manage the multiplicationi of efforts? > > > > they can read the main-list (this list) too, > > but maybe they can diskuss better in ohter languages. > > But if something interesting comes up in their list, the rest of us on the > main list would miss out. if it's really importent, they'll tell us! Egbert PS: Postmaster, please, set the "Reply-To:" to <gpc(a)gnu.de> for this list. It isn't nice to change the address every time. Egbert

5 7

Re: How does GPC/RTS work regarding date/time functions?
by david＠tcs01.demon.co.uk 12 Mar '01

12 Mar '01

In message <2BFD2555.20010312143145.FOO-2660.frank(a)g-n-u.de> Frank Heckenbach writes: > > > By the way in timestamp definition: > > Seconds is 0 .. 61 shoulden it be 0 .. 60 (as 0..59 gives a minuet) and 59 + 1 leap second gives 60? > > Somewhere (but I don't remember where) I found a mention of 0 .. 61, > apparently allowing for two leap seconds in a row. I'm not an expert > on these matters, and if someone who is confirms that this can't > happen, we can change it to 0 .. 60. (Otherwise, 0 .. 61 shouldn't > hurt, either.) I believe there is a *theoretical* possibility of adding two leap seconds (I think this would imply something pretty nasty had happened to the earth!) -- David James mailto:david@tcs01.demon.co.uk Special Stage Rally results archive <URL:http://www.tcs01.demon.co.uk/>

1 0

How does GPC/RTS work regarding date/time functions?
by Pernille Bech & Klaus F. Østergaard 12 Mar '01

12 Mar '01

I would like to help improving GPC with time and date procedure and functions. I have been looking into the GPC unit and found this: { Is the year a leap year? } function IsLeapYear (Year : Integer) : Boolean; asmname '_p_is_leap_year'; { Returns the length of the month, taking leap years into account. } function MonthLength (Month, Year : Integer) : Integer; asmname '_p_month_length'; Are you calling a c routine(asmname '_p_.......' ) ? if so why if in the unit gpc-bp the function is programmed in pascal? In gpc-bp unit : function IsLeapYear (Year : Integer) : Boolean; begin IsLeapYear := (Year mod 4 = 0) and ((Year mod 100 <> 0) or (Year mod 400 = 0)) end; function MonthLength (Month, Year : Integer) : Integer; const MonthLengths : array [1 .. 12] of Integer = (31, 28, 31, 30, 31, 30, 31, 31, 30, 31, 30, 31); begin if (Month < 1) or (Month > 12) then MonthLength := 0 else MonthLength := MonthLengths [Month] + Ord ((Month = 2) and IsLeapYear (Year)) end; If I want to help improve on the date time routines, what would the strategy be to maintain portability? I think that getting time from the system should be kept in C. All other calculation on date and time should be done in pascal, in the gpc- or a new datetime-unit, what ever that fits best into maintaining the compiler. I would like to begin with reorganizing and implementing following: Is LeapYear (f) validate date (f) validate time (f) calculate day of year (f) calculate week of year (f) calculate day of week (f) calculate standard to business date (year, week, day) (f) calculate business to standard (f) validate business date (f) functions to add/subtract year(s)/month(s)/day(s)/hour(s)/minuet(s)/second(s) funtion to find difference between to timestamps When this is done I think of things like this: formating date/time to strings decode string to date/time several languages to day and month names calculate easter sunday (f) conversion between gregorian and julian dates and reverse use julian day number insted of unix_time to make calculations on dates the airport hours in clik/ticks (1/100) format ect. By the way in timestamp definition: Seconds is 0 .. 61 shoulden it be 0 .. 60 (as 0..59 gives a minuet) and 59 + 1 leap second gives 60? Hope you can help me begin the right place and that all you other comes with idea's of what to put in a date/time unit as time goes, klaus

2 1

assert
by Adam Naumowicz 12 Mar '01

12 Mar '01

Hello, After compiling GPC from the current sources I noticed, that there appears a linking problem when using system unit and my own assert procedure, which was not the case with some precompiled binary distribution I used before. I understand that the routine is added for delphi compatibility, so is there a simple solution to eliminate it when running in --borland-pascal mode or I just have to rename my own procedure since the overloading is not working properly? Adam Naumowicz -------------------------------------- WWW: http://math.uwb.edu.pl/~adamn/ --------------------------------------

2 1

Timestamp format and calculations?
by Pernille Bech & Klaus F. Østergaard 11 Mar '01

11 Mar '01

type TimeStamp = {@@packed} record DateValid, TimeValid : Boolean; Year : Integer; Month : 1 .. 12; Day : 1 .. 31; DayOfWeek : 0 .. 6; { 0 means Sunday } Hour : 0 .. 23; Minute : 0 .. 59; Second : 0 .. 61; { to allow for leap seconds } MicroSecond : 0 .. 999999 end; Is there a function/procedure that calculates the DateValid and TimeValid. Does it proof the DayOfWeek? What is leap seconds and how does one calculate with leap seconds? Does any one know of standard libs/rutines for doing calculations/manipulations with the timestamp, like calculating the day of the week or finding time between two timestamps, with corrections to the diffent length of months ect. Thanks, Klaus

3 5

Re: Has class become a reserved word?
by david＠tcs01.demon.co.uk 10 Mar '01

10 Mar '01

In message <4C6E5C32.20010308193203.FOO-4495.frank(a)g-n-u.de> Frank Heckenbach writes: > Peter Gerwinski wrote: Having now looked at an 'Object Pascal Language Guide' that came with a copy of Borland Delphi for Windows, I'm not convinced that class is being handled in the Delphi manner. This Guide says "Unlike other types, a class type can be declared only in a type declaration part in the outermost scope of a program or unit. Therefore, a class type can't be declared in a variable declaration part or within a procedure, function, or method block." So an example similar to the example I posted last night: program test_class(input,output); type tcomp=packed record name:string[80]; class:1..15; end; var comp:tcomp; begin end. should fail. However, I think the following example: program test_class2(input,output); procedure proc; type tcomp=packed record name:string[80]; class:1..15; end; var comp:tcomp; begin end; begin proc; end. should compile (and it doesn't). I think the "news" section of the first part of the manual should document the introduction of class as a conditionally reserved word. For the moment Russ Whitaker's suggestion of {$define class thing} as a quick and dirty patch looks the easiest way for me to proceed with this upgrade. > > > The question is whether a separate switch, specifically for > > enabling/disabling keywords, makes sense. > > > > [...] I mean something like `--disable-keyword="Class"'. > > Perhaps accept a list of keywords, e.g. > `--disable-keywords="class,object"'. I like that scheme, since, as I posted earlier, I have source code which is such a collection of different dialects within single files that the dialect switches are no use to me. -- David James mailto:david@tcs01.demon.co.uk Special Stage Rally results archive <URL:http://www.tcs01.demon.co.uk/>

4 4

Re: Has class become a reserved word?
by david＠tcs01.demon.co.uk 10 Mar '01

10 Mar '01

In message <1F902E6F.20010309110245.FOO-6B42.frank(a)g-n-u.de> Frank Heckenbach writes: > David James wrote: > > > Having now looked at an 'Object Pascal Language Guide' that came with > > a copy of Borland Delphi for Windows, I'm not convinced that class is > > being handled in the Delphi manner. This Guide says "Unlike other > > types, a class type can be declared only in a type declaration part > > in the outermost scope of a program or unit. Therefore, a class type > > can't be declared in a variable declaration part or within a > > procedure, function, or method block." [snip] > > should compile (and it doesn't). > > I suppose that, while class declarations are allowed only globally > in the outermost scope, `class' is a reserved word throughout. > That's what the Chief said Delphi does, and what I know TP does with > `object'. I probably read too much into the section I quoted, what you say makes sense. > > We could try to make `class' conditionally reserved only in the > outermost scope, but I don't know how hard this would be (Peter?), But you probably shouldn't (for compatibility) if Delphi makes it reserved in places other than the outermost scope. > and it wouldn't solve the issue completely. So I think I'd prefer > `disable-keyword' as well... > > > I think the "news" section of the first part of the manual should > > document the introduction of class as a conditionally reserved word. > > I'm a little surprised. According my old copy of the 19990118 > sources, `class' was already conditionally reserved there. But > anywaym I will document it, Thank you. There's certainly been a change in behaviour between 19991030 and 20010306. > as well as `attribute' and `published' > which have become (conditional) keywords since that version AFAICT. > If there are more keywords I should mention, let me know. I've not come across any more, and I've now managed to compile our entire suite of programs under GPC 20010306. The next step is to see what happens when I try running them ... Have there been any changes in the packing of data in records or packed records between 19991030 and 20010306? Or any changes in the data transfer between variables and typed files (is that the correct name? I mean FILE OF Twhatever, where Twhatever is a TYPE defined in the source)? -- David James mailto:david@tcs01.demon.co.uk Special Stage Rally results archive <URL:http://www.tcs01.demon.co.uk/>

4 4

Where to place units from the RTS
by david＠tcs01.demon.co.uk 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

I've never really been clear on where units from the RTS are intended to be placed, and I'm even more uncertain now that I'm migrating from GPC 19991030 to GPC 20010306 ... Suppose I have a program that 'uses gpc' (one of the units from the GPC RTS). Where should gpc.o and gpc*.gpi be (this is under Linux)? And should they have been placed there by the make install when I built the compiler? I'd like to be able to say gpc prog.p and have it automatically find the gpc unit at compile time and at link time. At the moment I've put gpc.o and gpc*.gpi in the same directory as the program, and am specifying gpc.o in the command line, but there must be a neater way of doing it ... If this information is in either the GPC Info files (gpc.info*) or the INSTALL file, I've either not found it or not understood it. -- David James mailto:david@tcs01.demon.co.uk Special Stage Rally results archive <URL:http://www.tcs01.demon.co.uk/>

2 1

Re: Has class become a reserved word?
by david＠tcs01.demon.co.uk 09 Mar '01

09 Mar '01

In message <0873F763.20010309182845.FOO-3141.frank(a)g-n-u.de> Frank Heckenbach writes: [snip] > > > > The strict for keeping legacy apps running, the loose mode for > > interoperability. > > I don't see how this should solve Dave's problem. AFAIUH, he's using > "all" of GPC's features (i.e., not restricted to a particular > standard or dialect) and was only disturbed by a particular keyword. That's correct. This particular code started off in UCSD Pascal, was then migrated to Edinburgh Portable Compilers Extended Pascal (which complied with a subset of the *draft* Extended Pascal Standard, I think), and then migrated to GPC. In the migration to GPC (in late 1999) I found some Extended Pascal features we were using did not work reliably enough, and had to replace then by (probably) Borland/UCSD features. So it's a mismash ... [snip] > As I already said in other mails, I'd prefer some more options to > fine-tune the dialect (like --disable-keywords), so one doesn't have > to use a dialect option just because of one single issue (like in > this case). (Besides, those options are probably quite a bit easier > to implement than new dialect versions because they only affect > specific parts of the compiler.) As a user, that's my preference too. -- David James mailto:david@tcs01.demon.co.uk Special Stage Rally results archive <URL:http://www.tcs01.demon.co.uk/>

1 0