Jonas wrote:
First of all: please mention in the future that you are not subscribed
(also in replies, because people may forget), so that people who reply
know that they should CC you.
Sorry - I didn't notice (is it mentioned somewhere?).
** I'am not subscribed to this list, at present **
>/ Now, I would ask an advice: is it better to stick to ppudump, at a price of
/>/ some reduction in speed, and the risk that its output could change in
future,
/>/ invalidating the IDE parsing routines? Or is it better to use ppu.pas in
the
/>/ IDE, having confidence that ppu.pas will parse PPU file generated by
/>/ different versions/releases of freepascal?
/
Well, as far as I know, ppu simply skips blocks that it does not know,
so I would think it is safe to use.
I made some tries with two or three different releases, making ppudump
parse "its own" ppu files and ppu files from other releases. At
different extents, different problems arose. In one bad case, ppudump
(version about 2.2.0) crashed while parsing ppu files from its own
release, trying to allocate an enourmous block of memory. A self
compiled copy, took from 2.4.0 sources, did the same. Many times it
complained about "!! has more information" (who cares), "!! refid out of
range" or similar (critical). Anyway, using external ppudump, seems to
be the safest way to go... the only problem is that ppudump takes binary
informations and converts them in a human-readable form, which are later
parsed and converted again in binary form... it takes several seconds to
parse the big gtk2.ppu file.
Regards,
Doriano
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - [email protected]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
