[fpc-pascal]fpc 1.9.0 beta - error 200306065
I get the above error code when compiling a specific unit with the new 1.9.0 beta under Win32. It doesn't occur under either 1.0.10 or 1.0.6, which are the other two versions I keep around to test things. It only occurs when *compiling* the unit. When *building* the unit, it compiles perfectly, but if I immediately try to compile after this, I get the same error again. I would post the unit on my website & make a link here, except it's tied in to quite a few others... any ideas? ___ fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal]fpc 1.9.0 beta - error 200306065
> I get the above error code when compiling a specific unit with the new > 1.9.0 > beta under Win32. > > It doesn't occur under either 1.0.10 or 1.0.6, which are the other two > versions I keep around to test things. It only occurs when *compiling* the > unit. When *building* the unit, it compiles perfectly, but if I > immediately > try to compile after this, I get the same error again. > > I would post the unit on my website & make a link here, except it's tied > in > to quite a few others... > > any ideas? Without sources we can't do anything ___ fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
[fpc-pascal]FP newbie
Hi, I'm a FP newbie but a long-time Delphi and Pascal developer. I'm curious about several things regarding the current state of FP as well as its future. Since I'm considering the use of FP in classroom for my students and also for commercial development, I hope some of you could help me clear some things in my mind. #1. Is there a white paper on the features the FP compiler supports and the features it doesn't support when compared to the Delphi compiler? I know I can dig this info on the manuals but I was hoping to find a feature matrix indication the major diferences and similarities between the FP and Delphi compilers. #2. Does the exception handling architecture provide easy to the call stack and other potentially useful information about the exception? #3. Is there (planned) support for object serialization? #4. Is there (planned) support for object persistent (like J2EE container based persistence)? #5. Is there (planned) support for garbage collection on objects and/or pointers? I think that will do for now. Thanks, Demian ___ fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal]FP newbie
> I'm a FP newbie but a long-time Delphi and Pascal developer. I'm curious > about several things regarding the current state of FP as well as its > future. Since I'm considering the use of FP in classroom for my students > and also for commercial development, I hope some of you could help me > clear some things in my mind. > > #1. Is there a white paper on the features the FP compiler supports and > the features it doesn't support when compared to the Delphi compiler? I > know I can dig this info on the manuals but I was hoping to find a > feature matrix indication the major diferences and similarities between > the FP and Delphi compilers. No there isn't. The older 1.0.x series is a mix of D2 language with some later extensions, and a mix of a bit newer RTL (D4, though some parts at D2 level). The newer series that just went into beta (1.9.x as beta, and will be 2.0.x at some time) will be close to later versions (up to D7) compatible. However while already stable and usable, not all more exotic features have been tested, documented or even completely implemented. The only major language element completely missing afaik is dispinterface, while several other are incomplete. While e.g. some base fundamentals for packages have been implemented in the compiler, the related runtime parts have not been created yet. We find missing smaller functionality in the RTL nearly everyday, but that is partially also because this version went public only a week ago, it is the initial rush. > #2. Does the exception handling architecture provide easy to the call > stack and other potentially useful information about the exception? > #3. Is there (planned) support for object serialization? > > #4. Is there (planned) support for object persistent (like J2EE > container based persistence)? I'll let these pass. > #5. Is there (planned) support for garbage collection on objects and/or > pointers? It doesn't make much sense to create a compiler for an efficient, static, language, and then slow it down by mutilating it with a dog slow GC. There has been some academical interest/discussion in trying to make a proof of concept hierarchy (so a separate object hierarchy not based on tobject) that can be garbadge collected, but that certainly plans to do that outside the current classes hierarchy, with no or minimal compiler support. However all people that were discussing that are much to busy for that, so, unless an external contributor pops up, don't hold your breath. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal]FP newbie
Thanks for replying! >> #1. Is there a white paper on the features the FP compiler >> supports and the features it doesn't support when compared >> to the Delphi compiler? I know I can dig this info on the >> manuals but I was hoping to find a feature matrix indicating >> the major diferences and similarities between the FP and >> Delphi compilers. > > No there isn't. The older 1.0.x series is a mix of D2 language > with some later extensions, and a mix of a bit newer RTL (D4, > though some parts at D2 level). > > The newer series that just went into beta (1.9.x as beta, and > will be 2.0.x at some time) will be close to later versions (up > to D7) compatible. However while already stable and usable, not > all more exotic features have been tested, documented or even > completely implemented. > > The only major language element completely missing afaik is > dispinterface, while several other are incomplete. > > While e.g. some base fundamentals for packages have been > implemented in the compiler, the related runtime parts have > not been created yet. > > We find missing smaller functionality in the RTL nearly > everyday, but that is partially also because this version > went public only a week ago, it is the initial rush. I get the picture- it's a neverending work indeed! But I guess when the Lazarus IDE becomes a production software, the interest in FP will grow and will allow the project to run faster. I can tell as one of the moderators of the largest portuguese speaking groups on Yahoo! Groups (2200 subscribers) that if Lazarus were already available as a stable release on Windows and Linux, it would draw the attention of many, many users. Also, in the academia, I'm sure most institutions would choose FP over Delphi for their first year algorithm and programming logic classes, and second year OO programming- I would do that with my students! >> #2. Does the exception handling architecture provide easy >> to the call stack and other potentially useful information >> about the exception? >> >> #3. Is there (planned) support for object serialization? >> >> #4. Is there (planned) support for object persistence (like >> J2EE container based persistence)? > > I'll let these pass. ok... guess the answer would be no, then! >> #5. Is there (planned) support for garbage collection on >> objects and/or pointers? > > It doesn't make much sense to create a compiler for an > efficient, static, language, and then slow it down by > mutilating it with a dog slow GC. > > There has been some academical interest/discussion in trying > to make a proof of concept hierarchy (so a separate object > hierarchy not based on tobject) that can be garbadge collected, > but that certainly plans to do that outside the current classes > hierarchy, with no or minimal compiler support. > > However all people that were discussing that are much to busy > for that, so, unless an external contributor pops up, don't hold > your breath. OK, I understand you point. This leads me to another set of intriguing questions. #A. Does FP support other class hierarchies other than those starting at TObject? I mean, any FP object is a TObject, right? I wonder if it would be possible to create a new object hierarchy from scratch, not based on TObject. #B. Reflection support, as far as I understand, starts at TPersistent and relies on published properties. Is there any chance this could be made more flexible- I mean, let TObject properties support reflection? #C. Is there (planned) support for class attributes? #D. Is there (planned) support for class templates? #E. Is there (planned) support for wxWindows? I think this is a terrific abstraction layer for GUI. The best is that it is stable (10+ years), works on many plataforms, and as FP/Lazarus, it is OS. But it still doesn't have a Pascal port. #F. I haven't seen any links or pages through which I could volunteer to help with FP/Lazarus- where do I find that? Thanks again for your response! Regards, Demian ___ fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal]FP newbie
> Hi, > > I'm a FP newbie but a long-time Delphi and Pascal developer. I'm curious > about several things regarding the current state of FP as well as its > future. Since I'm considering the use of FP in classroom for my students > and also for commercial development, I hope some of you could help me > clear some things in my mind. > > #1. Is there a white paper on the features the FP compiler supports and > the features it doesn't support when compared to the Delphi compiler? I > know I can dig this info on the manuals but I was hoping to find a > feature matrix indication the major diferences and similarities between > the FP and Delphi compilers. > > #2. Does the exception handling architecture provide easy to the call > stack and other potentially useful information about the exception? > > #3. Is there (planned) support for object serialization? > > #4. Is there (planned) support for object persistent (like J2EE > container based persistence)? > > #5. Is there (planned) support for garbage collection on objects and/or > pointers? > > I think that will do for now. Thanks, > FP Team, I think we really need a document outlining the feature matrix of the compiler(s). If someone sends me the correct list, i'll LaTeXify it. anybody ? cheers, -Krish > Demian > > > ___ > fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal > ___ fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal]FP newbie
Hi!, > > #D. Is there (planned) support for class templates? Do we really need templates ? IMO, templates and reference based objects dont go too well. > > #E. Is there (planned) support for wxWindows? I think this > is a terrific abstraction layer for GUI. The best is > that it is stable (10+ years), works on many plataforms, > and as FP/Lazarus, it is OS. But it still doesn't have > a Pascal port. > wxWindows is a good library/framework indeed. But why do we need a pascal interface to it ? It adds too many layers to the whole system. eg: to create a button => pascal-layer->wxWindows->gtk+/motif/win32->window system window. Do we really need these layers ? (wrapper wrapping a wrapper wrapping a wrapper !!!) OTOH, what we really need is an emulating toolkit atop the native window system (a la FLTK). cheers, -Krish ___ fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
