Re: [fpc-pascal] syscalls and fpc
I found that the Do_Syscalls are written in assembly and have only limited number of parameters (up to 6). Is there a way to write it using array of TSysParam instead of having 7 different functions ? Maybe but it wouldn't make the assembler easier to read :-). Actually the assembler is not that hard to understand :) My point is, that I don't like the idea of 7 or 20 or 100 amount of parameters to give answer to every need. I think we should find a better way to implement it, like var args in C or open array in pascal... I don't see any reason why it needs to be changed. - It already works like var args in C from a program point of view. - Syscalls have a known limited number of parameters. - The way it now is programmed allows better code generation for the syscalls with limited parameters. - It is a syntax issue and there is a FAQ about syntax changes. Peter ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Compiler API specification
How would you implement the specification ? Would it be possible to simply embed the complete compiler into a DLL ? Or would that make little sense ? Bye, Skybuck. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] MySQL insert, load data
Ok. First one was simple. Keyword and opening bracket must be separated
by a blank, e.g.
'.. MYTABLE(..' // wrong
'.. MYTABLE (..' // great
'..)values(..' // wrong
'..) values (..' // great
All field contents have to be bracketed by double apostrophes, e.g.
q.sql.add('''Florian Klaempfl'',');
except it's an integer value, e.g.
q.sql.add('1,');
Date values seem to be put as formatted strings. Unfortunately, my MySQL
does not know Joost. His example, '1-jan-1975' works here as '1975.1.1'
only. Guess this is a config issue.
Now what about LOAD DATA?
I still have no idea where to look for it. I learned TSQLQuery is
descending Tbufdataset - TDBDataSet - TDataset - TComponent and
assume there is somewhere an option to load from a CSV text file or stream.
But how to push it forward to MySQL?
Wolfram
// Wolfram Kläger, 14.02.2008 22:49
Along Joost's examples I managed to get connected, create a table, put a
query, get the result, and insert a single row. But when I try to insert
several rows at once, I get an EDatabaseError near to first char of
second row.
...
q.SQL.Clear;
q.Add('insert into MYTABLE(c1, c2, ..) values ');
q.Add('(r1v1, r1v2, ..),');
q.Add('(r2v1, r2v1, ..),');
..
q.Add(';');
What am I missing or is multiple insert not supported?
Alternatively, MySQL provides the LOAD DATA [LOCAL] INFILE statement. So
far I was not able to find a special sqldb wrapper for it. Is it done
via ExecuteDirect?
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] MySQL insert, load data
Try this:
q.SQL.Clear;
q.Add('LOAD DATA INFILE ''data.txt'' INTO TABLE database.my_table;');
q.Execute; // -- I don't remember the correct command right now
Leonardo
--- Wolfram Kläger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok. First one was simple. Keyword and opening bracket must be separated
by a blank, e.g.
'.. MYTABLE(..' // wrong
'.. MYTABLE (..' // great
'..)values(..' // wrong
'..) values (..' // great
All field contents have to be bracketed by double apostrophes, e.g.
q.sql.add('''Florian Klaempfl'',');
except it's an integer value, e.g.
q.sql.add('1,');
Date values seem to be put as formatted strings. Unfortunately, my MySQL
does not know Joost. His example, '1-jan-1975' works here as '1975.1.1'
only. Guess this is a config issue.
Now what about LOAD DATA?
I still have no idea where to look for it. I learned TSQLQuery is
descending Tbufdataset - TDBDataSet - TDataset - TComponent and
assume there is somewhere an option to load from a CSV text file or stream.
But how to push it forward to MySQL?
Wolfram
// Wolfram Kläger, 14.02.2008 22:49
Along Joost's examples I managed to get connected, create a table, put a
query, get the result, and insert a single row. But when I try to insert
several rows at once, I get an EDatabaseError near to first char of
second row.
...
q.SQL.Clear;
q.Add('insert into MYTABLE(c1, c2, ..) values ');
q.Add('(r1v1, r1v2, ..),');
q.Add('(r2v1, r2v1, ..),');
..
q.Add(';');
What am I missing or is multiple insert not supported?
Alternatively, MySQL provides the LOAD DATA [LOCAL] INFILE statement. So
far I was not able to find a special sqldb wrapper for it. Is it done
via ExecuteDirect?
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] MySQL insert, load data
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, wrote:
Try this:
q.SQL.Clear;
q.Add('LOAD DATA INFILE ''data.txt'' INTO TABLE database.my_table;');
q.Execute; // -- I don't remember the correct command right now
Normally it is:
Q.ExecSQL;
Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] syscalls and fpc
ik wrote: Actually the assembler is not that hard to understand :) My point is, that I don't like the idea of 7 or 20 or 100 amount of parameters to give answer to every need. I think we should find a better way to implement it, like var args in C or open array in pascal... The linux kernel interface is always using registers, and since there are a limited amount of registers, there is a max. number of arguments. IIRC the maximum is 6, i386 limited: eax, ebx, ecx, edx, esi, edi, ebp. Micha ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] syscalls and fpc
Micha Nelissen schreef: ik wrote: Actually the assembler is not that hard to understand :) My point is, that I don't like the idea of 7 or 20 or 100 amount of parameters to give answer to every need. I think we should find a better way to implement it, like var args in C or open array in pascal... The linux kernel interface is always using registers, and since there are a limited amount of registers, there is a max. number of arguments. IIRC the maximum is 6, i386 limited: eax, ebx, ecx, edx, esi, edi, ebp. Fortunately I studied mathematics, so I can count the mentioned registers: 7. Vincent ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] syscalls and fpc
Micha Nelissen schreef: ik wrote: Actually the assembler is not that hard to understand :) My point is, that I don't like the idea of 7 or 20 or 100 amount of parameters to give answer to every need. I think we should find a better way to implement it, like var args in C or open array in pascal... The linux kernel interface is always using registers, and since there are a limited amount of registers, there is a max. number of arguments. IIRC the maximum is 6, i386 limited: eax, ebx, ecx, edx, esi, edi, ebp. Fortunately I studied mathematics, so I can count the mentioned registers: 7. Then you should also see dangerous hidden assumptions: Not all parameters occupy a single register. off_t for 64-bit fs calls e.g. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] syscalls and fpc
Vincent Snijders schrieb: Micha Nelissen schreef: ik wrote: Actually the assembler is not that hard to understand :) My point is, that I don't like the idea of 7 or 20 or 100 amount of parameters to give answer to every need. I think we should find a better way to implement it, like var args in C or open array in pascal... The linux kernel interface is always using registers, and since there are a limited amount of registers, there is a max. number of arguments. IIRC the maximum is 6, i386 limited: eax, ebx, ecx, edx, esi, edi, ebp. Fortunately I studied mathematics, so I can count the mentioned registers: 7. One stores the syscall number. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] syscalls and fpc
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 8:36 PM, Micha Nelissen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ik wrote: Actually the assembler is not that hard to understand :) My point is, that I don't like the idea of 7 or 20 or 100 amount of parameters to give answer to every need. I think we should find a better way to implement it, like var args in C or open array in pascal... The linux kernel interface is always using registers, and since there are a limited amount of registers, there is a max. number of arguments. IIRC the maximum is 6, i386 limited: eax, ebx, ecx, edx, esi, edi, ebp. You are welcome to correct me if I wrong, but can't I use prameters as follows: push param1 push param2 push param3 push paramX call syscall ? If so, then I don't think there is a specific need for using the eax, ebx registers etc.. Please look at the C deceleration of the syscall: int syscall(int number, ...); It uses var_args, and therefor 6 registers are not enough imho... because tomorrow some one can add new call with 10 params, and then what ? I can't find any documentation that limit the amount of parameters that can be given to the function (at least in Linux, maybe POSIX/BSD/Solaris/Other have different rules) Micha Ido -- http://ik.homelinux.org/ ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] syscalls and fpc
Another issue (I should report it as a bug imho) is that Do_Syscall is not really usable if you require to use different parameters then integer value, for example: PChar. A call for example that use PChar as one of it's parameter is inotify_add_watch . I think that the entire design of the Do_SysCall is malformed in the way it assumes the number of parameters and also the type of them, so as I asked before, how I can either call the syscall command without assembler, or how I can pass an array of const (prior to that I asked regarding array of TSysParam) to assembly if three is no other way to use syscall ? Ido On Feb 15, 2008 9:50 PM, ik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 8:36 PM, Micha Nelissen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ik wrote: Actually the assembler is not that hard to understand :) My point is, that I don't like the idea of 7 or 20 or 100 amount of parameters to give answer to every need. I think we should find a better way to implement it, like var args in C or open array in pascal... The linux kernel interface is always using registers, and since there are a limited amount of registers, there is a max. number of arguments. IIRC the maximum is 6, i386 limited: eax, ebx, ecx, edx, esi, edi, ebp. You are welcome to correct me if I wrong, but can't I use prameters as follows: push param1 push param2 push param3 push paramX call syscall ? If so, then I don't think there is a specific need for using the eax, ebx registers etc.. Please look at the C deceleration of the syscall: int syscall(int number, ...); It uses var_args, and therefor 6 registers are not enough imho... because tomorrow some one can add new call with 10 params, and then what ? I can't find any documentation that limit the amount of parameters that can be given to the function (at least in Linux, maybe POSIX/BSD/Solaris/Other have different rules) Micha Ido -- http://ik.homelinux.org/ -- http://ik.homelinux.org/ ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] syscalls and fpc
Another issue (I should report it as a bug imho) is that Do_Syscall is not really usable if you require to use different parameters then integer value, for example: PChar. I think that the entire design of the Do_SysCall is malformed in the way it assumes the number of parameters and also the type of them, so as I asked before, how I can either call the syscall command without assembler, or how I can pass an array of const (prior to that I asked regarding array of TSysParam) to assembly if three is no other way to use syscall ? So we can write you up as volunteer to write up prototypes (and worse maintain them) for about 300 calls per OS per arch? ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] syscalls and fpc
On Feb 16, 2008 2:00 AM, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: way it assumes the number of parameters and also the type of them, so as I asked before, how I can either call the syscall command without assembler, or how I can pass an array of const (prior to that I asked regarding array of TSysParam) to assembly if three is no other way to use syscall ? So we can write you up as volunteer to write up prototypes (and worse maintain them) for about 300 calls per OS per arch? So what you are saying is, that because there are many commands that can be used by syscall, you prefer to give support only to the ones that actually in use by most programs, rather then to write something more general that will support everything, and will do it right ? There is no need to support all of them in the first place, and with formal typing and support, also maintaining the structs come into play, making a testsuite etc. Nothing that supports everything is easy, and nothing is ever exactly right once reality comes crashing in, except the helicopter view before actually getting your hands wet. Sorry but I still don't understand... The problem is the design/approach of the way syscall is implemented in FPC, while you are saying that because there are so many OS/commands that each use it differently, you just want to leave it as-is because it works for you No, because it works period. So according to what you say, I can either mark that there is no support for syscall in FPC (half work for most of the times is not enough, it's just wrong desgin), or I don't understand whats going on. I still haven't the faintest clue what your problem actually is, aside from style issues. Sure it is not the neatest solution, but neither are syscalls in general. gcc solves it slightly better with heaps of macros and custom calling conventions, a luxury that we don't have. And different per OS-arch combination too. Moreover, there are multiple teams involved there (the respective kernel teams, glibc, kernel), and we have to do it ourselves. Moreover since more and more subsystems use functionality in libc that is more than a mere wrapper (unicode is getting more popular, the authentication and resolving systems get increasingly complicated due to security), and duplicating that on bare bones syscalls is both an awful lot of hard to get right work, and a security risk. But if you want me to get you of the maintain calls list, and put you onto the create custom calling conventions by having directives that can assign each and other param to a precies reg list, by all means, say so. I'd be happy to. I can write you up for the native unicode list and to fix netdb too if you wish. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] syscalls and fpc
On Feb 16, 2008 2:00 AM, Marco van de Voort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another issue (I should report it as a bug imho) is that Do_Syscall is not really usable if you require to use different parameters then integer value, for example: PChar. I think that the entire design of the Do_SysCall is malformed in the way it assumes the number of parameters and also the type of them, so as I asked before, how I can either call the syscall command without assembler, or how I can pass an array of const (prior to that I asked regarding array of TSysParam) to assembly if three is no other way to use syscall ? So we can write you up as volunteer to write up prototypes (and worse maintain them) for about 300 calls per OS per arch? So what you are saying is, that because there are many commands that can be used by syscall, you prefer to give support only to the ones that actually in use by most programs, rather then to write something more general that will support everything, and will do it right ? Sorry but I still don't understand... The problem is the design/approach of the way syscall is implemented in FPC, while you are saying that because there are so many OS/commands that each use it differently, you just want to leave it as-is because it works for you ... So according to what you say, I can either mark that there is no support for syscall in FPC (half work for most of the times is not enough, it's just wrong desgin), or I don't understand whats going on. Ido -- http://ik.homelinux.org/ ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
