On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
Both are 64 bit processors (but I'm not sure whether gcc on Solaris was built to be true 64-bit compiler!) -
If you want to know, you can output `SizeOf (Pointer)', `SizeOf (Integer)' and `SizeOf (MedInt)' (or in C: `sizeof (void *)', `sizeof (int)' and `sizeof (long)').
OK, here are the results:
Alpha Sparc Sizeof(Pointer) 8 4 Sizeof(Integer) 4 4 Sizeof(MedInt) 8 4
Thanks. I'm putting your programs in the test suite (mirsad[12].pas).
That's great! I thought of making some more thorough verifications of proper working of SETs, yet I wonder how much time is acceptable for a single test to last?
[...]
Anyway, by surface analisys of the listing it seemed to me that it will not show much, since it just calls _p_set_include and _p_set_in (these are as I suspect probably in RTL library?) ...
Yes, more precisely in p/rts/sets.pas
Insightful remark :-) ... Though on one glance I've no idea what might went wrong ...
Anyway - if I could be of more help (even including giving you access to our Alpha machine) -
Indeed, it would be very helpful if you could give me an account and somme disk space. I have a few ideas what could be wrong, and it's probably easier if I can test them on the actual machine, than each time asking you to do it and send me the results ...
It might be related to endianness, and at the moment I'm quite confident that it will be rather easy to fix.
OK. Whould 2GB be enough disk space (I don't think I can provide more at the moment, but you will not have quotas - so help yourself).
I'm very interrested in this SET feature in PASCAL, I think it's a great thing!!!
BTW, I've just fixed a few other bugs with sets, so you should wait for the next release, anyway, before using them seriously.
I'm hoping to chase out most possible bugs from SETs with my extensive tests, which would test if SETs really behave on system as we take for granted.
Also, if that may help, I've defined -DEGCS95 while compiling (I think that last time it did not compile without defining no -DEGCS....). Then again, I've used the same -DEGCS95 on Solaris and it works ...
Usually configure will detect the version automatically and write it into gcc-version.h, so one doesn't have to give any of these flags manually. However, there was a bug in it when using non-GNU grep. It was fixed before 20010924, but after 20010315.
OK. Taken for notice. I remember having problems with May verison of GPC and EGCS defines. Right now I've noticed that GPC doesn't compile well when -DEGCS97 is set on Solaris (with 20010924 version). I had to recompile everything from scratch with -DEGCS97, since I was not sure which moules should be recompiled and which not (young Zaphod plays it safe - they say :-) ) ...
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.