Re: [fpc-pascal] fstat usage
Francisco Reyes wrote: Trying the fstat function and don't seem to be getting the right values for ctime, mtime and atime. What OS and CPU ? Micha ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Porting linux to pascal, would it be, possible ?
How could Linus Torvalds write the core of Linux in rather short time, single-handed, if it is such a huge task just to port it? Because he didn't really write it from scratch, instead he just improves what's already there (Unix source code, maybe?) and poing! Linux comes up. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-Porting-linux-to-pascal%2C-would-it-be%2C%09possible---tp20852694p20868042.html Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Re: Porting linux to pascal, would it be possible ?
In our previous episode, Guillermo Mart?nez Jim?nez said: I think the problem here (again) is not the language, it's the critical mass of users of the language. Using C for Linux was a good bet, not because the language is good (Pascal is way better for me), but because C has a wider user base who can fix/add features. I disagree. C is better for write operating systems *by definition*: C was created to write UNIX, Pascal was created to learn good programming techniques. C is low/mid-level language, Pascal is high-level (and Object Pascal is even higher): OS are the lowest software level. I don't see that at all. Sure original Pascal started and ended a bit higher. But this is a Free Pascal list, and Free Pascal and Delphi can get down and dirty too. There sure isn't much in C that FPC can not do. And the few bits that miss (if any) would probably be added soon when major OS development would start. I think it is more a matter of FPC being geared towards apps development as a compiler than a matter of language. I'm not saying it's impossible: here you have MacOS and Toro. I'm just saying that _I think_ it isn't the best option. Of course a better option is to write the kernel in C and Assembler and the utilities in Pascal and Object Pascal. Well, it is a pity that there is so much routine discussion in this thread that seems to boil down to a dogmatic kneejerk C is better, C has always been better, because Linux/Unix was programmed in it, and so little real funded argumentation why this is really the case. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Porting linux to pascal, would it be, possible ?
Ok, so lots of code... Two possibilities come to mind: 1. Using automatic conversion from C to Pascal but then the code would still have to be checked by humans. 2. Only convert certain portions which are most interesting to people. For example: Linux's tcp/ip stack. Linux gui. So that for example Linux gui might be improved by pascal programmers ;) :) Is that possible ? ;) Bye, Skybuck. - Original Message - From: Vincent Snijders [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: FPC-Pascal users discussions fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 4:09 PM Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Porting linux to pascal, would it be, possible ? Skybuck Flying schreef: If everybody does a little bit it could go quite quickly. Some (arbitrary numbers) from http://www.ohloh.net/p/linux: Codebase 10,679,927 lines Effort (est.) 3,396 Person Years So, if everybody on this list (maybe 300 persons) work on it, then it can be done in just over 11 years. Not so quickly, IMHO. Vincent ___ 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
[fpc-pascal] bitwise generator
Hello, I wish to create a firebird generator that does bitwise generation rather then ordinal generator. I mean: 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 etc.. Does anyone have knowledge how to create such generation in firebird ? Thanks, Ido http://ik.homelinux.org/ ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal] [OT] What would your second language be and why?
Hi I know this is a bit off-topic in this mailing list, but I also know that asking this question here will give me unbiased answers. My daytime job is secure and I am a very happy Object Pascal developers. I'm a firm believer in rather learning one language and being very proficient in it, that being a jack of all trades, but master of none. I have learned and used my share of languages over the years, but prefer Object Pascal a lot more than any of the others. But there comes a time, when I like to extend my knowledge a bit. Pick up some new skills and maybe ever carry those skills over to my daytime job and programming language. From the start I have been a big fan of the Java programming language. To me, it's a very clean and well designed language and is relatively easy to learn and understand. Just a shame the GUI performance was so bad, though that was many years back. I don't know if things have improved since. Anyway, I want to extend my skills in the new years and start learning a new language (make no mistake, Free Pascal is still what's paying my bills every month, and that's not going to change any time soon). My requirements is something that supports multiple platforms and that is one of the mainstream languages. I don't want to learn some obscure language like D or F# that nobody would hire you for - there just isn't a commercial demand for such languages, no matter how good features they have. Anyway, what I see as mainstream at the moment is Java and C#. Both seem to be well designed, commercially acceptable (from a job hiring point of view) and appears to be clean code. Scripting / interpreted languages like Perl etc are out! So for me, it seems a choice between C# and Java. So far I am leaning towards Java, because it's more open (no big giant monopoly hanging over it), been around for years and is commercially viable. Development tools, documentation etc are plenty full! Plus it's well supported on just about any OS and device. * What's your thoughts between Java vs C#? * Have you got a better choice in mind and why? Regards, - Graeme - ___ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] GTK Pascal and Gnome applets
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 4:08 AM, Andres Linares [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it possible to write Gnome Applets using GTK on Pascal? Do somebody know about this? Sure it is possible, but I don't know if there are already translated bindings for the required library. The translation job is usually easy. There is a C tutorial about this which should be easy to follow translating things to pascal: http://projects.gnome.org/ORBit2/appletstutorial.html -- Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal] [moderator] [OT] What would your second language be and why?
On 06 Dec 2008, at 11:21, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: I know this is a bit off-topic in this mailing list Indeed. Please use the fpc-other list for this sort of questions. All replies to this list will be reject. It is not polite to inundate people who are only here for asking and reading about FPC-related programming-technical questions with all sorts of meta discussions. Thanks, Jonas FPC lists moderator ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Porting linux to pascal, would it be, possible ?
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 5:20 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How far did you guys get with the 'fpwm' project? Did it actually run at some point. I see the last code changes was 2 years ago. I think it was able to run, but wouldn't do much. Too many other tasks at hand, and this one isn't making any money, so it has very low priority... -- Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] [moderator] [OT] What would your second language be and why?
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Jonas Maebe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 06 Dec 2008, at 11:21, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: I know this is a bit off-topic in this mailing list Indeed. Please use the fpc-other list for this sort of questions. All Sorry, I didn't know there was another mailing list. I'll repost my question there. Regards, - Graeme - ___ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] fstat usage
Micha Nelissen writes: Francisco Reyes wrote: Trying the fstat function and don't seem to be getting the right values for ctime, mtime and atime. What OS and CPU ? Tried FreeBSD 6.3 on i386, AMD CPU and Opensuse 10.3 64 bits AMD cpu ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] bitwise generator
ik writes: I wish to create a firebird generator that does bitwise generation rather then ordinal generator. I mean: 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 etc.. Does anyone have knowledge how to create such generation in firebird ? I am not clear what you are trying to do. You are trying to generate the sequence above, that much I get. However, is it a pascal program which will be a firebird stored procedure? The algorithm to generate the sequence is trivial so I don't quite follow which part you are having problems with. The generation? The creation of the firebird stored procedure? If the question is how to generate the sequence in Firebird and not use FPC, then the answer is that you need to have some sort of stored procedure. You could even just have a table with the values. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] bitwise generator
Thanks for the answer. I wanted to do it using Firebird instead of my Pascal code.. now I understand thanks to you, that I need to do it using stored procedure. Thanks, Ido On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Francisco Reyes [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: ik writes: I wish to create a firebird generator that does bitwise generation rather then ordinal generator. I mean: 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 etc.. Does anyone have knowledge how to create such generation in firebird ? I am not clear what you are trying to do. You are trying to generate the sequence above, that much I get. However, is it a pascal program which will be a firebird stored procedure? The algorithm to generate the sequence is trivial so I don't quite follow which part you are having problems with. The generation? The creation of the firebird stored procedure? If the question is how to generate the sequence in Firebird and not use FPC, then the answer is that you need to have some sort of stored procedure. You could even just have a table with the values. ___ 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
[fpc-pascal] setting unit output dir in packages/extra
Hi, I'm trying hard to make a package thatfits inside fpc/packages/extra. Most things do work, but some details are missing still. How and where is the setting made that directs the output of package compilation to $targetos/something and the installation target path? A typical packages/extra Makefile.fpc looks like this and has no out path setting. For reference: snip # # Makefile.fpc for fpgtk # [require] packages=fcl gtk [package] name=fpgtk version=2.0.4 [target] units=fpglib fpgtk fpgtkext rsts=fpgtk fpgtkext [install] fpcpackage=y [default] fpcdir=../../.. /snip Other possibilities are having something in the Makefiles upwards the directory tree or the fpc.cfg used when compiling ... TIA, Marc ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal] Embarcadero/CodeGear officialy interested in Firebird and on native versions of Delphi for other operating systems ...
Hi all, something i just read at http://www.firebirdnews.org and in Marco Cantu's blog ( http://blog.marcocantu.com/blog/coderage_2008_closing.html ) regards, -- Dimitrios Chr. Ioannidis ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal] Free Pascal Support for ARM Architecture
Hello I have read on the wiki that FP supports ARM.. which I find very interesting.. After reading the manuals I see that FP uses the GNU tools as back-ends and they support ARM ... but it that the extent of the support here. For example, the ASM directive in FP targets the IA33 processor semantics/syntax ...not ARM .. I am not opposed to working up the missing pieces if that's necessary, but before beginning that work, I wanted to check with the group and see if anyone had already started down this road and if so how far along have you gotten ? Thanks Pricne ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Free Pascal Support for ARM Architecture
On 06 Dec 2008, at 23:32, Prince Riley wrote: After reading the manuals I see that FP uses the GNU tools as back- ends and they support ARM ... but it that the extent of the support here. For example, the ASM directive in FP targets the IA33 processor semantics/syntax ...not ARM .. I guess you mean IA32 rather than IA33. Anyway, FPC is always compiled with support for creating code for one single cpu architecture. The currently supported ones are i386 (=IA32), x86_64, powerpc (32 bit), powerpc64, sparc and ARM. Apart from generating code for one such architecture, every such compiler can also only parse assembler code written for that same architecture (since there is no way the compiler can translate assembler code written for one architecture into assembler code for another architecture). I am not opposed to working up the missing pieces if that's necessary, but before beginning that work, I wanted to check with the group and see if anyone had already started down this road and if so how far along have you gotten ? ARM support works fairly well (except for EABI support, which still has some bugs). Jonas ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal] order of unit tests
Hi, currently I'm observing the following behaviour: - test cases are run in the order of their registration - testing procedures (per test) are run in the order of their declaration in the test class Since I can save a lot of work depending on this orders I'd like to do so. ;) Is there any argument speaking against assuming fixed order behaviour? Not for test suites, as I understand it, but that's fine with me. TIA, Marc ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Free Pascal Support for ARM Architecture
Hello Thanks for that reply ... and yes I meant IA32 A few additional points if I may .. When you say the FP supports the ARM architecture my specific question is how does FP 'inform' the GNU assembler back end of which ARM architecture is intended ... The following is just a snippet from the GNU Assembler manual showing the ARM processore option codes ... -mcpu=processor[+extension...] This option species the target processor. The assembler will issue an error message if an attempt is made to assemble an instruction which will not execute on the target processor. The following processor names are recognized: arm1, arm2, arm250, arm3, arm6, arm60, arm600, arm610, arm620, arm7, arm7m, arm7d, arm7dm, arm7di, arm7dmi, arm70, arm700, arm700i, arm710, arm710t, arm720, arm720t, arm740t, arm710c, arm7100, arm7500, arm7500fe, arm7t, arm7tdmi, arm8, arm810, strongarm, strongarm1, strongarm110, strongarm1100, strongarm1110, arm9, arm920, arm920t, arm922t, arm940t, arm9tdmi, arm9e, arm946e-r0, arm946e, arm966e-r0, arm966e, arm10t, arm10e, arm1020, arm1020t, arm1020e, ep9312 (ARM920 with Cirrus Maverick coprocessor), i80200 (Intel XScale processor) iwmmxt (Intel(r) XScale processor with Wireless MMX(tm) technology coprocessor) and xscale. The special name all may be used to allow the assembler to accept instructions valid for any ARM processor. In addition to the basic instruction set, the assembler can be told to accept various extension mnemonics that extend the processor using the co-processor instruction space. For example, -mcpu=arm920+maverick is equivalent to specifying -mcpu=ep9312. The following extensions are currently supported: +maverick +iwmmxt and +xscale. I need to be clear on how FP specifies one of these option and how the 'assemble' directive within the FP syntax is implemented to use ARM register and assembler sematics/syntax which the GNU Assembler assumes will be set by the language 'front end' Thanks Prince On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Jonas Maebe [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: On 06 Dec 2008, at 23:32, Prince Riley wrote: After reading the manuals I see that FP uses the GNU tools as back-ends and they support ARM ... but it that the extent of the support here. For example, the ASM directive in FP targets the IA33 processor semantics/syntax ...not ARM .. I guess you mean IA32 rather than IA33. Anyway, FPC is always compiled with support for creating code for one single cpu architecture. The currently supported ones are i386 (=IA32), x86_64, powerpc (32 bit), powerpc64, sparc and ARM. Apart from generating code for one such architecture, every such compiler can also only parse assembler code written for that same architecture (since there is no way the compiler can translate assembler code written for one architecture into assembler code for another architecture). I am not opposed to working up the missing pieces if that's necessary, but before beginning that work, I wanted to check with the group and see if anyone had already started down this road and if so how far along have you gotten ? ARM support works fairly well (except for EABI support, which still has some bugs). Jonas ___ 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] order of unit tests
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 1:08 AM, Marc Santhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since I can save a lot of work depending on this orders I'd like to do so. ;) Could you explain, I don't fully understand your statement. Is there any argument speaking against assuming fixed order behaviour? One of the design guidelines for unit testing is that tests must NEVER rely on the output of other tests. So the order of tests are really irrelevant. Any single tests or test suite must be able to run and pass without first having to run others in a set order. Regards, - Graeme - ___ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
