Hi! Am Dienstag, den 13.05.2014, 11:46 +0200 schrieb Tomas Hajny: > On Tue, May 13, 2014 10:54, Johann Glaser wrote: > > Hi! > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> > I'm working on a project with an external library (libtcl, it is > >> written > >> > in C) which creates some problems with back traces for exceptions. > >> . > >> . > >> > >> While not completely related to your original topic, I'd like to ask you > >> if you decided knowingly not to use the package "tcl" provided with FPC > >> (and possibly improve / extend it for your target platform) and if so, > >> what were your reasons. > >> > >> I ask because I'm not sure to which extent it's used and/or maintained, > >> especially considering that it supports a fairly limited set of > >> platforms > >> measured by current FPC span and that the included name of the TCL DLL > >> for > >> Win32 does not seem to match currently available TCL version. > >> > >> Should the package not to be useful any longer, we should probably > >> either > >> update it (if anyone volunteers to maintain it, because I suspect that > >> the > >> original maintainer is not involved actively any longer), or consider > >> deprecating it. > > > > I have to admit that I didn't consider that there could already be a TCL > > unit available. Therefore I did a full header translation for TCL 8.4 > > (which > > was the current version at that time). Additionally I added an object > > oriented wrapper to ease the programming. > > > > Please see at https://github.com/hansiglaser/pas-tcl for the sources. > > > > I use this library (together with pas-readline) in several projects (e.g. > > "eztool" on Github), some of which are actively in development but not yet > > published. It currently works perfectly with TCL 8.5, but I didn't (yet) > > update the header translations. > > > > I'd be happy for any help improving the library or even inclusion in FPC! > > Since you already use TCL, could you please check if the version included > with FPC is still useable at all with the currently available TCL version? > I guess that you'd be probably able to modify one of your test programs to > only use functions available in the older TCL version (or create another > simple test for that purpose if that would be easier)?
I used the files in /usr/share/fpcsrc/2.6.4/packages/tcl/ which also include a demo program. I had to do the following changes: - tcl80.pp: remove the $define USE_C - tcl80.pp: change TCL_LIBRARY = 'tcl8.5'; - tcl80.pp: in function ArgvItem I removed the ridiculous assembler stuff by the simple line "Result := argv[Idx];". This expression should also be used in tcl_demo.pp, btw. - copied over test.tcl from a quite old SVN checkout of http://svn.freepascal.org/svn/fpc/trunk (2011-03-05) I had somewhere on my disk Then compilation worked properly and the demo works too. Using tcl8.6 also works. > Depending on the result (and compatibility of the relevant licences), we > have to agree with other members of the FPC core team on the most sensible > approach. I noticed that there are some obvious differences in used types > (pointer versus PChar, minor differences in parameter or record member > names, etc.) between the two translations, but these might not impose a > major issue. Ok. > > PS: I've mentioned the TCL library in the fpc-pascal list some time ago: > > http://lists.freepascal.org/fpc-pascal/2012-September/035177.html > > I see; I probably missed it then. > > BTW, I noticed that you refer to file license.terms in multiple places of > your repository, but I couldn't find that file there. That is a verbatim cite of the original TCL header files. Is it necessary to include their file with my Pascal translations? Thanks Hansi _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel