In any case, we are getting off the subject,
Finally, a word of wisdom...
which was how to store a set of varying-length strings with minimal wasted space.
... except that the subject of this mailing list is not "how to store something somewhere", but "the GNU Pascal Compiler", in case you didn't notice. Discussion of the Pascal Macro Compiler belongs to the Pascal Macro Compiler mailing list.
Another thing which you apparently didn't notice, although three people already asked you to do so: please, turn off HTML in your mail.
Emil Jerabek
The subject of this thread in the GPC mailing list is how to store character strings without wasted space. Notive that the subject of this thread is "Packing strings ()" That was the subject of the original posting that started the thread.
I have mentioned the Pascal Macro Compiler because it comes with macros that have the ability to pack strings without wasted space. That is the original question, and this is an appropriate answer to the question. I have not discussed the Pascal Macro Compiler in any other context except to answer the question in this thread.
I have gone to great lengths to avoid creating any HTML in my postings to this mailing list. To avoid HTML-style quoting, I am copying the postings myself, and inserting all of those greater-than signs by hand. I have avoided putting in any links because I have not found a way to suppress the anchor tags. I have not done any form of text emphasis other than using caps, used no colors, inserted no pictures or backgrounds, and given no email links. I don't see what I am doing that makes you see HTML in my posts.
I can't see any signs of HTML in these emails, other than line breaks, which are already in the emails when I receive them from the mailing list. If I manually removed the line breaks, then the gt-signs would no longer be along the left edge, but interspersed in the text. I don't think that would be desirable.
I have tried to stick to the subject, but other people have been attacking my postings for all sorts of reasons that I believe are tangential at best, such as the use of text compression, hashing, trees and linked lists. I have tried to point out that these are separate issues, but I get attacked again when I do that.
I am starting to wonder if this isn't some kind of hazing for the new guy, and if I want to join this fraternity then I have to undergo this ritual. Or maybe you are just testing me to see if I am worthy to be in this august company.
Frank Rubin
Contestcen@aol.com wrote:
Part 1.1 Type: Plain Text (text/plain) Encoding: 7bit
This is how the header and the very beginning of your message appears (quoted to avoid line wrap):
Received: from ngc224.gerwinski.de ([213.133.98.203]) by worldnet.att.net (mtiwmxc17) with ESMTP id <2005072120242901700gmiuge>; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 20:24:29 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [213.133.98.203]
.... snippage ....
From: Contestcen@aol.com Message-ID: 190.444ded83.30115e43@aol.com Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 16:23:31 EDT Subject: [gpc] Packing strings () To: gpc@gnu.de MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1121977411" X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5041 X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) Precedence: bulk Sender: gpc-owner@gnu.de Reply-To: gpc@gnu.de X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 X-UIDL: 2005072120243101700rq73ve02tgmp
-------------------------------1121977411 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In any case, we are getting off the subj
Notice the header lines specifying MIME-Version: 1.0 and Content-Type. This means you are transmitting a mime-encoded attachment. Following is a clipping from another message on the list, taken more or less at random, and notice the Content-Type: heading and Content-Transfer-Encoding: header. I have no idea what mailer you are using (9.0 for Windows etc.. ??) but he is using ELM, which is a proper mailer. My mailer has been told to reject all those dangerous encodings, so I have to go through funny gyrations to see what I have just shown you.
You can look up the standards, including RFCs 2822, 2045, 2046, and 2047 (I think).
Now fix your system before sending anything further here. Please. It may require getting a standards compliant mailer. I realize you are using the worlds worst ISP in AOL, but that was your choice.
Received: from ngc224.gerwinski.de ([213.133.98.203]) by worldnet.att.net (mtiwmxc11) with ESMTP id <20050612193747011005d6rre>; Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:37:47 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [213.133.98.203]
.... snippage ....
Subject: Re: [gpc] RE : Question on procedure parameters In-Reply-To: 1118257681.12114.55967@goedel.fjf.gnu.de To: gpc@gnu.de Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 21:37:32 +0200 (CEST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL100 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: E1DhYGy-0006Fw-00@hera.math.uni.wroc.pl From: Waldek Hebisch hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) Precedence: bulk Sender: gpc-owner@gnu.de Reply-To: gpc@gnu.de X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 X-UIDL: 2005061219374701100hs985e02tbn4
Frank Heckenbach wrote:
Pascal Viandier wrote:
Anyway, I tried the conformant array parameter type and it works perfectly well for my needs (even on
Frank Rubin wrote:
I have gone to great lengths to avoid creating any HTML in my postingsto this mailing list. To avoid HTML-style quoting, I am copying the postings myself, and inserting all of those greater-than signs by hand. I have avoided putting in any links because I have not found a way to suppress the anchor tags. I have not done any form of text emphasis other than using caps, used no colors, inserted no pictures or backgrounds, and given no email links. I don't see what I am doing that makes you see HTML in my posts.
I can't see any signs of HTML in these emails, other than line breaks,which are already in the emails when I receive them from the mailing list. If I manually removed the line breaks, then the gt-signs would no longer be along the left edge, but interspersed in the text. I don't think that would be desirable.
To be exact: your mails do contain plain text message. But they also contain a HTML copy of the message. Some mailers show only text version, some will internally convert text to HTML and render it for viewing, so you miss the difference. But as other noticed the line:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1121977411"
in the headers shows that it is not a plain mail. AFAIK nothing you type will turn of HTML mail (but you probably can add things like links which will disable text version). You need to find a configuration setting for your mailer to disable HTML.
Below part of your message viewed as raw text (to show you transition from plain text to HTML):
I am starting to wonder if this isn't some kind of hazing for the new guy, and if I want to join this fraternity then I have to undergo this ritual. Or maybe you are just testing me to see if I am worthy to be in this august company.
Frank Rubin
-------------------------------1121977411 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><HEAD> <META charset=3DUS-ASCII http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; cha= rset=3DUS-ASCII"> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fffff= f">
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 12:27:11AM +0200, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
Frank Rubin wrote:
I have gone to great lengths to avoid creating any HTML in my postingsto this mailing list. To avoid HTML-style quoting, I am copying the postings myself, and inserting all of those greater-than signs by hand. I have avoided putting in any links because I have not found a way to suppress the anchor tags. I have not done any form of text emphasis other than using caps, used no colors, inserted no pictures or backgrounds, and given no email links. I don't see what I am doing that makes you see HTML in my posts.
I can't see any signs of HTML in these emails, other than line breaks,which are already in the emails when I receive them from the mailing list. If I manually removed the line breaks, then the gt-signs would no longer be along the left edge, but interspersed in the text. I don't think that would be desirable.
To be exact: your mails do contain plain text message. But they also contain a HTML copy of the message. Some mailers show only text version, some will internally convert text to HTML and render it for viewing, so you miss the difference. But as other noticed the line:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1121977411"
in the headers shows that it is not a plain mail. AFAIK nothing you type will turn of HTML mail (but you probably can add things like links which will disable text version). You need to find a configuration setting for your mailer to disable HTML.
And if you don't know how, you may take a look at http://www.expita.com/nomime.html, which contains detailed information on turning off HTML for many popular mailers. With a bit of luck, yours is listed there too, or at least it can give you some hint. Though, if your mailer can't even do standard quoting in replies, you might as well save yourself time and trouble and switch to a different mailer.
Emil Jerabek
Contestcen@aol.com wrote:
The subject of this thread in the GPC mailing list is how to storecharacter strings without wasted space. Notive that the subject of this thread is "Packing strings ()" That was the subject of the original posting that started the thread.
I have mentioned the Pascal Macro Compiler because it comes with macrosthat have the ability to pack strings without wasted space. That is the original question,
Not again please!!! Peter himself made it explicitly clear that he asked for runtime storage (which was clear to all of us except you from the beginning).
I have gone to great lengths to avoid creating any HTML in my postingsto this mailing list. To avoid HTML-style quoting, I am copying the postings myself, and inserting all of those greater-than signs by hand.
As I said, why are you making things so complicated? Use a proper mailer, and you'll neither have to do qouting by hand, nor inadvertently send HTML.
I have tried to stick to the subject, but other people have beenattacking my postings for all sorts of reasons that I believe are tangential at best, such as the use of text compression, hashing, trees and linked lists. I have tried to point out that these are separate issues, but I get attacked again when I do that.
Because you don't seem to realize that your answer about compile-time storage is, at best, tangential to the original question. And again, most people apparently are more interested in efficient access than minor(!) space savings. You might care for the latter at the cost o99f the former, but why do you keep posting about it if nobody else here shares this preference. Use it for yourself and be happy with it, but don't bother others who don't like it. We're well aware that this is possible, one way or the other, but apparently noone here wants to do that.
I am starting to wonder if this isn't some kind of hazing for the newguy, and if I want to join this fraternity then I have to undergo this ritual. Or maybe you are just testing me to see if I am worthy to be in this august company.
Really not. Unfortunately, the main archives are still offline (but you might be able to find mirrors through Google). There you'll see that few, if anyone, had so many initial problems. Some did an HTML posting or strange quoting in their initial mail, but after a friendly reminder, they changed it. You're probably the first one who seems to need a majority vote of all list subscribers to convince you (would 2/3 of all who ever posted to the list be enough for you, counting abstentions as negative votes? ;-), and constantly ignores all pointers to standard netiquette (including numerous ones in private mail, I must add).
PS:
If you need to initialize a character array greater than 255 chars in BP, you can resort to using absolute. For example Const ch1: array[1..5,1..100] of char = ('First 100 chars', 'Second 100 chars', ..., 'Last 100 chars'); Var ch: array[1..500] of char absolute ch1;
That's really non-portable, a BP *only* solution (if at all). If the compiler aligns the sub-arrays, it can break. Since BP is finished, you could check all versions and make sure it works on all of them, but on other compilers, it's a recipe for suicide. And you mentioned, in another PM, the possibility of using multiple compilers ...
If you really must do things that exceed the capabilities of an old compiler, you can try to trick around it. Or you can just use a newer, better compiler. That's one reason why we develop GPC, BTW.
Frank
On 21 Jul 2005 at 16:23, Contestcen@aol.com wrote: [....]
I am starting to wonder if this isn't some kind of hazing for the newguy, and if I want to join this fraternity then I have to undergo this ritual. Or maybe you are just testing me to see if I am worthy to be in this august company.
New people come on the list all the time. There is no bizarre initiation rite. The secret is to be able to take a hint - otherwise people eventually have to talk in plain language ...
Best regards, The Chief -------- Prof. Abimbola A. Olowofoyeku (The African Chief) web: http://www.greatchief.plus.com/
-
CBFalconer -
Contestcen＠aol.com -
Emil Jerabek -
Frank Heckenbach -
Prof A Olowofoyeku (The African Chief) -
Waldek Hebisch