Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 09:28:17 +1000
Steve Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marc Weustink wrote:
One of the pretexts behind OpenMP is that the code will still compile
if
OpenMP is not available or disabled on a particular compiler.
Mwah... in that case you can still use the same keywords, only it won't
be much parallel, since it's executed in one thread.
And beeing executed in one or more threads should not matter in parallel
blocks.
But then your code is locked to that version of FPC that supports those
new keywords.
Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives.
Therefore if your code should work with multiple compilers, you will
probably enclose the omp additions with IFDEFs anyway.
{$IFDEF HasOMP}cobegin{$ENDIF}
OpenMP uses pragmas, because
- They didn't want to break ANSI C. FPC has its own mode and compatibility
modes for others.
- It takes time before all the C compilers support the OMP additions.
For example default gcc does not yet.
Do we plan a syntax for FPC or for pascal in general?
- C programmers are more used to macros and pragmas, than pascal programmers
to compiler directives.
IMO Directives are ugly.
- C programmers are more used to hints and notes, than pascal programmers.
Although recent fpc additions changed that (hints about
unused/uninitialised variables).
IMO Noisy notes make it harder to find the relevant compiler messages.
Mattias
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
John Coppens wrote: On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:11:49 +0200 Vinzent Höfler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alan Burns? That's a name which rings a bell. You could have send the URL, though. ;) http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~burns/pf.html Hmm, and taking a peek look at the examples, it doesn't really surprise me, that this just looks like the Pascal version of Ada's tasking. Hi Vinzent. Yes - quite famous. But apart from the ADA style resources, it also implement a number of other tools, such as channels/remote invocation, etc. Yes, he borrowed from quite some concurrent languages (the semaphore could be Modula, and the channels maybe occam, I'm not sure). It still looks very much like Ada to me, especially the remote invocation just looks like Ada's rendezvous. Well, he calls it process, not task - just like in VHDL - but apart from that it looks very similar. The cobegin/coend pair to specify concurrency is elegant, though maybe somewhat 'flat'. What do you mean by 'flat'? That it can't be nested? If I read the OpenMP specs correctly, they say there, that they don't expect vendors to implement nested stuff real soon anyway. :) Yet, I don't see a compelling reason - apart from the question how to implement it - why a nice new syntax couldn't nest cobegins just like we already do with begins: cobegin Do_This; Do_That; cobegin Do_More; Do_Much_More; coend; coend; Not sure of that would work. ;) Well, I guess, I have to read the specs more thoroughly, perhaps I come up with an idea, how all this stuff can be mapped nicely to this ugly C hack. They even state, that they are so much more special an better compared with all the existing concurrent languages, that I'd like to prove them otherwise. ;) Vinzent. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
Marco van de Voort wrote: new keywords. Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives. Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown compiler directives. So you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6) Does Delphi support FPC style macros? In that case, perhaps as sort of include file to map cobegin or whatever to normal ones ... And then I prefer the clean syntax. Yes, absolutely. Vinzent. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
Marco van de Voort wrote: new keywords. Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives. Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown compiler directives. So you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6) Does Delphi support FPC style macros? In that case, perhaps as sort of include file to map cobegin or whatever to normal ones ... No. There is not much that can be done about this. Except postprocessing FPC source and stripping out paralel syntax. Be it directives or keywords. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
Marco van de Voort wrote: Marco van de Voort wrote: new keywords. Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives. Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown compiler directives. So you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6) Does Delphi support FPC style macros? In that case, perhaps as sort of include file to map cobegin or whatever to normal ones ... No. There is not much that can be done about this. Except postprocessing FPC source and stripping out paralel syntax. Be it directives or keywords. In that case directives don't make any sense like they'd do in a C-version. So it'll have to be syntax. :) Vinzent. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Nano-x
Patch cprt0.as for your libc. The libc that my platform is using is micro libc, and unfortunately the micro libc is initialized the same way as libc. Does anyone have a hint? Carsten ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
Vinzent Höfler wrote: Marco van de Voort wrote: Marco van de Voort wrote: new keywords. Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives. Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown compiler directives. So you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6) Does Delphi support FPC style macros? In that case, perhaps as sort of include file to map cobegin or whatever to normal ones ... No. There is not much that can be done about this. Except postprocessing FPC source and stripping out paralel syntax. Be it directives or keywords. In that case directives don't make any sense like they'd do in a C-version. So it'll have to be syntax. :) Ok. Beaten. :) But at least it provoked discussion on it. -- Sly This message and its attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information. This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you may not copy or deliver this message or its attachments to anyone. Rather, you should permanently delete this message and its attachments and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. Any content of this message and its attachments, which does not relate to the official business of the sending company must be taken not to have been sent or endorsed by the sending company or any of its related entities. No warranty is made that the e-mail or attachment(s) are free from computer virus or other defect. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Nano-x
Patch cprt0.as for your libc. The libc that my platform is using is micro libc, and unfortunately the micro libc is initialized the same way as libc. Does anyone have a hint? objdump a helloworld C program, and investigate. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
2006/7/20, Florian Klaempfl [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Tomas Hajny wrote: On 20 Jul 06, at 22:41, Florian Klaempfl wrote: Rainer Stratmann wrote: Am Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2006 13:44 schrieb Jason P Sage: . . In my view these simple things must have highest priority. In the Linux installation routine there is an install-question something like do you want to install /usr/ or /usr/local/ The default is fine? A beginner can not know what this is good for. Also there is no information if the install routine on Linux must have root rights... Well, because it depends on were you install? People not installing as root should know how to change /usr/local to something appropriate. So if a beginner does not get work these simple things he give up very fast. People don't dig into such stuff will be never good programmers, so I see no real problem if they give up :) Programming is full of such challenges. ;-) What would you think about distribution of Win32 version with install.bat script asking you Since linux people didn't get it to make a common gui, a gui installer isn't doable. There is autopackage.org which is a very nice piece of work... but al c/c++ centric. -- Alexandre Leclerc ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
Am Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2006 22:41 schrieb Florian Klaempfl: Rainer Stratmann wrote: Am Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2006 13:44 schrieb Jason P Sage: I know most of you know this stuff and it's a no brainer - but - I just wanted to say this because I see people having problems sometimes getting started and sometimes its easier to go around the ditch than to build a bridge! It is a reason, why fp don't come closer to the critical mass. Which critical mass? Pascal is an ideal, maybe the best programming language. Do you want that more people use it? I saw pictures about a booth whith the maintainers of fpc at a linux-fair. It would be better if you can say to the ones who are interested that fpc is a language whith a userfriendly environment. I am sure in this case more people would use it. In my view these simple things must have highest priority. In the Linux installation routine there is an install-question something like do you want to install /usr/ or /usr/local/ The default is fine? ...maybe for the linux expert... ...many people want to swith from another os, so they are not familiar with linux... ...when I type /usr/local then error messages come, so this irritates then and is a reason why not use it or why to say it is not good enough... A beginner can not know what this is good for. Also there is no information if the install routine on Linux must have root rights... Well, because it depends on were you install? People not installing as root should know how to change /usr/local to something appropriate. Sorry I don't know this at the moment of installing, like you don't know at this moment how to make userfriendly installers ;) So if a beginner does not get work these simple things he give up very fast. People don't dig into such stuff will be never good programmers, so I see no real problem if they give up :) Programming is full of such challenges. Partly I agree, but, what has a good programmer to do with internals of any os? That a programmer should be an intelligent person does not mean that it could not be an advantage if fpc run out of the box. It would be shining a better light on fpc then. If the installing step is easy then many people can use their source code they wrote for dos for example. Ok, there are then many challenges to do, but hello world runs already then and it is very easier to build up on hello world then got nothing to work. Tomas Hajny wrote: ;-) What would you think about distribution of Win32 version with install.bat script asking you to choose whether you want to put cygwin1.dll in system32 or your new bin directory? So all you're asking for is a If you don't know the answer, just press ENTER? Isn't that the default already? ;) It woul be an advantage, if there is a short description why to type what. ...at the moment the user can ask the same question if it is the default already...? ;) When there is a description the user is more sure about the installation. Vinzent. Rainer ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal] A Free Pascal Installer that's easier? For Newbies?
OK - I can see that. But, I personally am busy all the time, coding, clients, life etc. I have released things here and there. I'm working on something that I hope will eventually take a life on of its own - that is TOTALLY FREEPASCAL. I think Free Pascal is just the best language going - syntactically, platform support, etc. I'm also the first to agree its missing things. My personal approach to Free Pascal concerning things that are missing, is to write something for it, or make a wrapper for a core unit supplied with it. Like the MySql4 unit. That is a ton of work translating headers... some one did it! Woo Hoo! (THANK YOU!) I can not and will not complain about there not being an Microsoft ADO-Like call to connect and another to toss out and yet another to loop through them. How about that supplied ODBC unit? Do you know just how much work went into making that useable at all? I'm planning on writing a wrapper for the MySql4 unit (eventually maybe ODBC too) like I did with the version MySql3 version. Works great! I leveraged what was supplied, to take it somewhere I wanted to go. So I suppose my point is - that perhaps you, or someone else can take your first Free Pascal experience and build a wonderful graphical GUI installer, for all the POSIX platforms (thinking you mentioned Linux) that any new comer can appreciate. Before you do however, you might take a look at what Redhat has done. I use Fedora Redhat Linux 5. In their RPM package handler, it has Free Pascal, as an option in the Developer Section, you can install. You click the CHECK BOX, and it goes and looks for the latest version (I think it does anyway) and grabs it and installs it for you. I've done the install both ways. Once I forgot what I selected, and I think I installed FPC to both locations! Wow - how do you undo that? Oops! And I'm an... ahem... expert :) Have a great Day people! Jason P Sage -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 8:44 AM To: fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org Subject: fpc-pascal Digest, Vol 23, Issue 33 Send fpc-pascal mailing list submissions to fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of fpc-pascal digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: Common OpenMP syntax? (Vinzent H?fler) 2. Re: Common OpenMP syntax? (Vinzent H?fler) 3. Re: Common OpenMP syntax? (Marco van de Voort) 4. Re: Common OpenMP syntax? (Vinzent H?fler) 5. Re: Nano-x (Carsten Bager) 6. Re: Common OpenMP syntax? (Steve Williams) 7. Re: Nano-x (Marco van de Voort) 8. Re: Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc. (Alexandre Leclerc) 9. Re: Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc. (Rainer Stratmann) -- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:16:15 +0200 From: Vinzent H?fler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax? To: FPC-Pascal users discussions fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed John Coppens wrote: On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:11:49 +0200 Vinzent Höfler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alan Burns? That's a name which rings a bell. You could have send the URL, though. ;) http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~burns/pf.html Hmm, and taking a peek look at the examples, it doesn't really surprise me, that this just looks like the Pascal version of Ada's tasking. Hi Vinzent. Yes - quite famous. But apart from the ADA style resources, it also implement a number of other tools, such as channels/remote invocation, etc. Yes, he borrowed from quite some concurrent languages (the semaphore could be Modula, and the channels maybe occam, I'm not sure). It still looks very much like Ada to me, especially the remote invocation just looks like Ada's rendezvous. Well, he calls it process, not task - just like in VHDL - but apart from that it looks very similar. The cobegin/coend pair to specify concurrency is elegant, though maybe somewhat 'flat'. What do you mean by 'flat'? That it can't be nested? If I read the OpenMP specs correctly, they say there, that they don't expect vendors to implement nested stuff real soon anyway. :) Yet, I don't see a compelling reason - apart from the question how to implement it - why a nice new syntax couldn't nest cobegins just like we already do with begins: cobegin Do_This; Do_That; cobegin Do_More; Do_Much_More; coend; coend; Not sure of that would work. ;) Well, I guess, I have to read the specs more
Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
Rainer Stratmann wrote: Partly I agree, but, what has a good programmer to do with internals of any os? That a programmer should be an intelligent person does not mean that it could not be an advantage if fpc run out of the box. What do you count as internals ? Surely the programmer should be familiar with basic directory layout ? Just like windows has C:\Windows, C:\Program Files, etc. unix has other conventions. I wouldn't count these as internals of the OS. Micha ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
Marco van de Voort wrote: People don't dig into such stuff will be never good programmers, so I see no real problem if they give up :) Programming is full of such challenges. Partly I agree, but, what has a good programmer to do with internals of any os? Philosophically saying, that would enter the programmer into a purely consumer relation with the OS. Which isn't the case in OSS, since there is a shared responsibility by all users, nobody excluded. . . You hit the point, except that it _is_ becoming the case with Linux distributed by companies who provide support to their users. ;-) FPC installer shouldn't make assumptions about the type of user (consumer or OSS geek), because both exist nowadays. Tomas ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
Am Freitag, 21. Juli 2006 15:07 schrieb Micha Nelissen: Rainer Stratmann wrote: Partly I agree, but, what has a good programmer to do with internals of any os? That a programmer should be an intelligent person does not mean that it could not be an advantage if fpc run out of the box. What do you count as internals ? Surely the programmer should be familiar with basic directory layout ? Just like windows has C:\Windows, C:\Program Files, etc. unix has other conventions. I wouldn't count these as internals of the OS. Yes, ideally the programmer should know all of it in any os. To simplify it, internals for me are things because a program does not run. O.K. the conventions of Linux I don't know exactly... I don't know at the moment what /usr/local/ is good for... But is it necessary to know it for programming? Micha Rainer ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
Marco van de Voort wrote: Philosophically saying, that would enter the programmer into a purely consumer relation with the OS. Which isn't the case in OSS, since there is a shared responsibility by all users, nobody excluded. You hit the point, except that it _is_ becoming the case with Linux distributed by companies who provide support to their users. ;-) FPC installer shouldn't make assumptions about the type of user (consumer or OSS geek), because both exist nowadays. Incorrect, and I don't see what an OSS geek is supposed to be. I/We don't have a consumer relation with what you call consumers. Those distro's that pocketed the cash have. That is not that I'm against decent release building, but there is a tradeoff here, and one that is aggrevated due to use of several installer and hierarchy conventions. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
On 21 Jul 2006, at 11:42, Marco van de Voort wrote: Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives. Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown compiler directives. So you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6) I think at least in this case GPC also matters, since Florian is also soliciting feedback on the syntax on the GPC list (and code written for parallel calculations can probably be easily made compatible with multiple Pascal dialects). I don't know what they do with unknown compiler directives though. Jonas ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
Is there not a standard by distributions which tells software the standard place to install. I have noticed different distributions seem to have different preferences. :-) It seems there should be a file in /etc which would have defined places for installation of software, configuration information, and where to put variable files (files you change in operation). something like: pref1_global-install /usr/local pref2_global-install /usr/share pref3_global_install /opt pref_local_install~/apps place_local_link_in ~/bin place_gobal_link_in /usr/local/bin xmenu_add /usr/bin/xmenu_add [global|local] bin desc --- dale On Friday 21 July 2006 06:50, Marco van de Voort wrote: Marco van de Voort wrote: Philosophically saying, that would enter the programmer into a purely consumer relation with the OS. Which isn't the case in OSS, since there is a shared responsibility by all users, nobody excluded. You hit the point, except that it _is_ becoming the case with Linux distributed by companies who provide support to their users. ;-) FPC installer shouldn't make assumptions about the type of user (consumer or OSS geek), because both exist nowadays. Incorrect, and I don't see what an OSS geek is supposed to be. I/We don't have a consumer relation with what you call consumers. Those distro's that pocketed the cash have. That is not that I'm against decent release building, but there is a tradeoff here, and one that is aggrevated due to use of several installer and hierarchy conventions. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
On 7/21/06, Alexandre Leclerc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is autopackage.org which is a very nice piece of work... but al c/c++ centric. If you look on google there are several statements from the main developers of ubuntu, gentoo and other major distributions that say horrible things about autopackage. It´s considered one of the worse ways to install an application possible. Just one link: http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/functions/src_unpack/autopackage/index.html There are dozens of other links of other distros says even worse things. AFAIK the solution to easely install a software on Linux is to use the native packages, like .rpm and .deb Thinking about that I wrote a tutorial for people that use free pascal and want to generate rpm packages for their software here: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/index.php/Deploying_Your_Application -- Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
On 21 Jul 2006, at 11:42, Marco van de Voort wrote: Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown compiler directives. So you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6) I think at least in this case GPC also matters, since Florian is also soliciting feedback on the syntax on the GPC list (and code written for parallel calculations can probably be easily made compatible with multiple Pascal dialects). I meant more that GPC also still can implement the new syntax. This will be a bit harder with Delphi :-) ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
Am Freitag, 21. Juli 2006 20:00 schrieb Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho: AFAIK the solution to easely install a software on Linux is to use the native packages, like .rpm and .deb The solution for fpc at this moment is quite ok. It does not have to be graphical. It can be improved for those who don't know the linux conventions for example. I only want to say that because I write programs for people who don't know any conventions. So I see it from this point. If fpc wants to get more users - then in my opinion the highest priority is to get fpc as fast as possible and as easy as possible to run. Conventions can be learned later also. Also a good way would be to put it in distributions for example Knoppix or Kanotix. Rainer ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
