Waldek Hebisch wrote:
Yes, I think we should not mark 4.1 based version as "experimental". There are some regressions compared to gpc based on 3.4.6 but they are minor.
The failure of prep2.pas on Mac OS X can lead to nasty problems in software that depends on the missing defines. So, for Darwin, I am checking in the following diff (although it may be wrong for cross-compilers)
diff -ur gcc-4.1.2-orig/gcc/p/gpcpp.c gcc-4.1.2/gcc/p/gpcpp.c --- gcc-4.1.2-orig/gcc/p/gpcpp.c 2007-09-04 08:22:53.000000000 +0200 +++ gcc-4.1.2/gcc/p/gpcpp.c 2007-09-18 10:36:57.000000000 +0200 @@ -1187,6 +1187,14 @@ strcat (strcpy (tmp_buf, "__GPC_RELEASE__="), GPC_VERSION_STRING); make_definition (tmp_buf, 1);
+#ifdef __APPLE__ + make_definition ("__APPLE__", 1); +#endif + +#ifdef __MACH__ + make_definition ("__MACH__", 1); +#endif + /* Now handle the command line options. */ /* Do -U's and -D's in the order they were seen. */ for (i = 1; i < argc; i++)
I can't speak for the other platforms. From http://www.gnu-pascal.de/crystal/gpc/en/mail14109.html it looks like prep2.pas didn't fail on DJGPP ?
Regards,
Adriaan van Os