Am 29.04.2012 17:50, schrieb Thomas Schatzl:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 17:38 +0200, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>> Am 29.04.2012 17:34, schrieb Thomas Schatzl:
>>> Hi
florian@ubuntu32:~$ ldd ./test
libfprtl-2.7.1.so =>
/home/florian/./fpc/svn/rtl/units/i386-linux/libfprtl-2.7,
Interested people might want to have a look at
http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=12492
there are iirc still unprocessed patches in that report.
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo
Hi,
On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 17:38 +0200, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
> Am 29.04.2012 17:34, schrieb Thomas Schatzl:
> > Hi
> >> florian@ubuntu32:~$ ldd ./test
> >> libfprtl-2.7.1.so =>
> >> /home/florian/./fpc/svn/rtl/units/i386-linux/libfprtl-2.7,
> >
> > Actually, this output shows the bug already
Am 29.04.2012 17:34, schrieb Thomas Schatzl:
> Hi
> On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 15:50 +0200, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>> Am 29.04.2012 15:13, schrieb Jorge Aldo G. de F. Junior:
>>> If you deploy one executable, ok, but if you want to create a handfull
>>> of executables (following unix logic of many small
Hi
On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 15:50 +0200, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
> Am 29.04.2012 15:13, schrieb Jorge Aldo G. de F. Junior:
> > If you deploy one executable, ok, but if you want to create a handfull
> > of executables (following unix logic of many small programs) then you
> > have a problem.
>
> Indee
In our previous episode, Florian Kl?mpfl said:
> > make sysutils/runtime etc an external loadable library and we are
> > going to see FPC generate similar sized executables for similarly
> > sized programs.
>
> It makes them look smaller but their footprint is actually larger so
> this is exactly
Am 29.04.2012 15:13, schrieb Jorge Aldo G. de F. Junior:
> If you deploy one executable, ok, but if you want to create a handfull
> of executables (following unix logic of many small programs) then you
> have a problem.
Indeed, but I don't think this is the way FPC programs are typically used.
>
On 29 Apr 2012, at 15:13, Jorge Aldo G. de F. Junior wrote:
> If you deploy one executable, ok, but if you want to create a handfull
> of executables (following unix logic of many small programs) then you
> have a problem.
You certainly do end up with larger executables. Whether or not this is a
If you deploy one executable, ok, but if you want to create a handfull
of executables (following unix logic of many small programs) then you
have a problem.
EVERY executable will have the same code again again again, i think
libraries have been created to address exactly this issue.
about the lib
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 29 Apr 2012, at 14:23, Jorge Aldo G. de F. Junior wrote:
What would be usefull is to move the loads of code stored in
sysutils/runtime into a dll/so.
That's mainly useful if the external API of the RTL will ever stabilize, which
is certainly not the case today. Otherwis
Am 29.04.2012 14:23, schrieb Jorge Aldo G. de F. Junior:
> What would be usefull is to move the loads of code stored in
> sysutils/runtime into a dll/so.
>
> thats what makes C code look "smaller", theres a nice libc (and
> others) there that groups mostly used functions into a single
> instance,
On 29 Apr 2012, at 14:23, Jorge Aldo G. de F. Junior wrote:
> What would be usefull is to move the loads of code stored in
> sysutils/runtime into a dll/so.
That's mainly useful if the external API of the RTL will ever stabilize, which
is certainly not the case today. Otherwise you create a dyn
What would be usefull is to move the loads of code stored in
sysutils/runtime into a dll/so.
thats what makes C code look "smaller", theres a nice libc (and
others) there that groups mostly used functions into a single
instance, while in pascal every executable replicates the very same
code for ea
On 29 Apr 2012, at 12:22, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
> Spent more man power into optimizer development, though some
> optimizations are hard in pascal because we assume stricter aliasing
> rules and because we don't have a volatile keyword.
At least as far as our current optimizers are concerned, no
Am 29.04.2012 11:40, schrieb ik:
> Hello,
>
> Here is something that I'm asking without really know anything about
> the subject, so please bear with me.
>
> I'ved asked few places that works with Pascal (Delphi and FPC), why
> does they use C as the infrastructure, and they all say that there is
Hello,
Here is something that I'm asking without really know anything about
the subject, so please bear with me.
I'ved asked few places that works with Pascal (Delphi and FPC), why
does they use C as the infrastructure, and they all say that there is
not even one Pascal compiler that makes the co
16 matches
Mail list logo
