Hi folks
I have built gpc 20030323 with gcc-3.2.3 sources, both under Cygwin and Mingw. I used the gcc-3.2.2.diff. There were no problems with either configuring or building. I have not yet run the testsuites, but everything seems okay with my own programs.
Best regards, The Chief -------- Prof. Abimbola A. Olowofoyeku (The African Chief) web: http://www.bigfoot.com/~african_chief/
Dnia - Âśroda 30 kwi 2003, o 00:10:37 +0100 - Prof A Olowofoyeku (The African Chief) napisaÂł(-a): Hi
I have built gpc 20030323 with gcc-3.2.3 sources, both under Cygwin and Mingw. I used the gcc-3.2.2.diff. There were no problems with either configuring or building. I have not yet run the testsuites, but everything seems okay with my own programs.
My test (all ok only one warning):
Testing xgpc 20030323, based on gcc-3.2.3 (athlon-pc-linux) (lx.siec), [...] TEST fjf386.pas: gpc1: warnings being treated as errors fjf386.pas: In procedure `baz': fjf386.pas:11: warning: statement with no effect ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^______
TEST fjf480a.pas: SKIPPED: librx not installed TEST fjf480b.pas: SKIPPED: librx not installed TEST regextest.pas: SKIPPED: librx not installed
# of GPC tests 3324 # of GPC tests passed 3320 # of GPC tests skipped 3 # of GPC tests failed 1 (fjf386.pas - warning only, run OK)
Best regards Jarek -- 8 \|||// Jaroslaw J. Pyszny (arghil@zsk.tech.us.edu.pl) \|||// b (o|o) "Vitae,non scholae,discimus" (o|o) i --_/-- Linux user: #96704 (http://counter.li.org) --_/-- t =-> Masz 8-bit. komputer i chcesz siĂŞ go pozbyc - daj znac. <-=
Jaroslaw J. Pyszny wrote:
My test (all ok only one warning):
Testing xgpc 20030323, based on gcc-3.2.3 (athlon-pc-linux) (lx.siec), [...] TEST fjf386.pas: gpc1: warnings being treated as errors fjf386.pas: In procedure `baz': fjf386.pas:11: warning: statement with no effect ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^______
Could you please check after the next GPC release if the warning is still there?
Frank
On 3 May 2003 at 23:50, Jaroslaw J. Pyszny wrote:
[...]
My test (all ok only one warning):
Testing xgpc 20030323, based on gcc-3.2.3 (athlon-pc-linux) (lx.siec), [...] TEST fjf386.pas: gpc1: warnings being treated as errors fjf386.pas: In procedure `baz': fjf386.pas:11: warning: statement with no effect ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^______
I got 2 failures under Mingw (I am running test_run directly). The failures look spurious to me:
TEST dostest.pas: gpc1.exe: warnings being treated as errors ./../units/system.pas: In function `MemAvail': ./../units/system.pas:634: warning: capitalisation of identifier `T' doesn't match ./../rts/gpc.pas:1620: warning: previous capitalisation `t' gpc1.exe: c:\mingw\bin\gpc.exe exited with status 1 failed
TEST fjf437.pas: gpc1.exe: warnings being treated as errors ./../units/system.pas: In function `MemAvail': ./../units/system.pas:634: warning: capitalisation of identifier `T' doesn't match ./../rts/gpc.pas:1620: warning: previous capitalisation `t' gpc1.exe: c:\mingw\bin\gpc.exe exited with status 1 failed
Best regards, The Chief -------- Prof. Abimbola A. Olowofoyeku (The African Chief) web: http://www.bigfoot.com/~african_chief/
Prof A Olowofoyeku (The African Chief) a écrit:
On 3 May 2003 at 23:50, Jaroslaw J. Pyszny wrote:
[...]
My test (all ok only one warning):
Testing xgpc 20030323, based on gcc-3.2.3 (athlon-pc-linux) (lx.siec), [...] TEST fjf386.pas: gpc1: warnings being treated as errors fjf386.pas: In procedure `baz': fjf386.pas:11: warning: statement with no effect ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^______
I got 2 failures under Mingw (I am running test_run directly). The failures look spurious to me:
TEST dostest.pas: gpc1.exe: warnings being treated as errors ./../units/system.pas: In function `MemAvail': ./../units/system.pas:634: warning: capitalisation of identifier `T' doesn't match ./../rts/gpc.pas:1620: warning: previous capitalisation `t' gpc1.exe: c:\mingw\bin\gpc.exe exited with status 1 failed
TEST fjf437.pas: gpc1.exe: warnings being treated as errors ./../units/system.pas: In function `MemAvail': ./../units/system.pas:634: warning: capitalisation of identifier `T' doesn't match ./../rts/gpc.pas:1620: warning: previous capitalisation `t' gpc1.exe: c:\mingw\bin\gpc.exe exited with status 1 failed
This is a consequence of the new warnings on different capitalisations. Run with -Wno-identifier-case (e.g. through EXTRA_TEST_PFLAGS) to eliminate. I have realized recently with horror than "identifier name conflicts" is really between identifier names, even if for pascal they are completely unrelated objects, i.e. two local identifiers in two different modules, like in this case. This is completely against any modularity concept. So I have replaced eveywhere in my system -Wall by -Wall -Wno-identifier-case When seeing the related discussions on the list, I had understood that the warning was for different capitalizations of the identifier of the same pascal object, which is useful, at least from the aesthetic point of view.
Maurice
Maurice Lombardi wrote:
I got 2 failures under Mingw (I am running test_run directly). The failures look spurious to me:
TEST dostest.pas: gpc1.exe: warnings being treated as errors ./../units/system.pas: In function `MemAvail': ./../units/system.pas:634: warning: capitalisation of identifier `T' doesn't match ./../rts/gpc.pas:1620: warning: previous capitalisation `t' gpc1.exe: c:\mingw\bin\gpc.exe exited with status 1 failed
I'll fix this in the next version (since it was in the Windows-only code, I didn't catch them).
This is a consequence of the new warnings on different capitalisations. Run with -Wno-identifier-case (e.g. through EXTRA_TEST_PFLAGS) to eliminate. I have realized recently with horror than "identifier name conflicts" is really between identifier names, even if for pascal they are completely unrelated objects, i.e. two local identifiers in two different modules, like in this case. This is completely against any modularity concept.
Sorry, do we have to discuss this every week again?
Frank
Frank Heckenbach a écrit:
Maurice Lombardi wrote:
I got 2 failures under Mingw (I am running test_run directly). The failures look spurious to me:
TEST dostest.pas: gpc1.exe: warnings being treated as errors ./../units/system.pas: In function `MemAvail': ./../units/system.pas:634: warning: capitalisation of identifier `T' doesn't match ./../rts/gpc.pas:1620: warning: previous capitalisation `t' gpc1.exe: c:\mingw\bin\gpc.exe exited with status 1 failed
I'll fix this in the next version (since it was in the Windows-only code, I didn't catch them).
This is a consequence of the new warnings on different capitalisations. Run with -Wno-identifier-case (e.g. through EXTRA_TEST_PFLAGS) to eliminate. I have realized recently with horror than "identifier name conflicts" is really between identifier names, even if for pascal they are completely unrelated objects, i.e. two local identifiers in two different modules, like in this case. This is completely against any modularity concept.
Sorry, do we have to discuss this every week again?
No. Too bad.
Maurice
-
Frank Heckenbach -
Jaroslaw J. Pyszny -
Maurice Lombardi -
Prof A Olowofoyeku (The African Chief)