Maybe you'll have an easier time with either Synapse or Lnet. I don't
know if either of them have the functionality you need, but I had a
pretty easy time getting them both working on linux.
http://lnet.wordpress.com/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/synalist/
On Thu 24 Sep 2009, yu ping wrote:
I just now download indy-10.2.0.3.tar.gz - for Unix/Linux system users.
and build success on windows.
the file indy-10.2.0.3.zip - for Windows users. damaged ,can not be
decompressed.
when I try to build indy10 files from http://indy.fulgan.com/ZIP/
I get a lot of mistaks:
-- make ---
fpc-pascal-boun...@lists.freepascal.org scritti il 25/09/2009 05.34.53
> Thanks.
> another question,any one has successful compile indy on FPC?
> I tried,but did not success.
Indy 10? It's FPC compatible.
Indy 9 not.
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pa
Thanks.
another question,any one has successful compile indy on FPC?
I tried,but did not success.
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
2009/9/24 Reimar Grabowski :
>
> Sometimes you are just too funny, Graeme.
:-)
Does FPC actually differentiate optimization between Core2 vs i7 vs
Phenom etc? Or does it group those into something like optimization
level 3 (just an example) and detect currently used CPU itself (if not
specified l
yu ping wrote:
Program prog1
use unit1
myObj=class
private
public
.
end;
---
unit unit1
..
like above, can i access myObj in unit1?
Much better to have something like this:
Program prog1;
uses CommonStuff, unit1;
..
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:15:24 +0200
"graemeg.lists" wrote:
> I don't know which "model" mine is.
> model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPUQ9400 @ 2.66GHz
Sometimes you are just too funny, Graeme.
R.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is
2009/9/24 Marco van de Voort :
>
> Which quad core? There are afaik at least four microarchitectures for x86_64
> that have quadcores. I7, Core2 (depending on your viewpoint if that counts
> as a quadcore or a dual dualcore), Phenom and Phenom II.
I don't know which "model" mine is. Here is partia
In our previous episode, graemeg.lists said:
> How optimized is FPC itself when I do a 'make all' in the source
> directory? No optimization, memory optimized, speed optimized, all of
> the above, etc..
>
> Can I improve performance of the 64bit FPC compiler for my Quad Core
> processor? If so, w
Hi,
How optimized is FPC itself when I do a 'make all' in the source
directory? No optimization, memory optimized, speed optimized, all of
the above, etc..
Can I improve performance of the 64bit FPC compiler for my Quad Core
processor? If so, what parameters do I pass to the make command?
Rega
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, yu ping wrote:
Program prog1
use unit1
myObj=class
private
public
.
end;
---
unit unit1
..
like above, can i access myObj in unit1?
No.
A unit only has access to symbols that appear in units in it's uses clause.
The program can
Program prog1
use unit1
myObj=class
private
public
.
end;
---
unit unit1
..
like above, can i access myObj in unit1?
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailma
In our previous episode, ? said:
> I just tried to unfairly compare fpc-compiled binary and gcc-compiled
> binary under my Gentoo box. FPC is incredible. `ps` data shows the fpc
> one costs nearly no memory? But I still notice it is a little slow. It
> usually costs 0.5~1.0 time more than t
Thank you very much.
2009/9/24 Jonas Maebe :
>
> On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:53, 章宏九 wrote:
>
>> 2009/9/24 Jonas Maebe :
>>>
I would like also to know the situation in C. (I mean
declaration of printf and scanf. Are they implemented in glibc or
gcc?)
>>>
>>> In glibc.
>>
>> Unlike pascal?
Hello Jonas,
Thursday, September 24, 2009, 12:04:20 PM, you wrote:
> On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:59, Alexey Voytsehovich wrote:
>> Yes, it looks like what I need. :) Another question, can I use gdb as
>> a reference? That is, from the command line to send him a request and
>> get an answer. To chec
On 24 Sep 2009, at 11:04, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:59, Alexey Voytsehovich wrote:
gdb testexcept.exe info line *0x004015c3
You should be able to do this:
echo "info line *0x004015c3" > gdb.txt
gdb -batch --command=gdb.txt
Sorry,
gdb testexcept.exe -batch --command=gdb.tx
On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:59, Alexey Voytsehovich wrote:
Yes, it looks like what I need. :) Another question, can I use gdb as
a reference? That is, from the command line to send him a request and
get an answer. To check each address automatically, but before work to
run a script that will fill t
Hello Jonas,
Thursday, September 24, 2009, 11:47:10 AM, you wrote:
> Runtime error 216 at $271C
>$271C
>$2744
>$00024720
>$26D0
>$23E0
>$1000
> then you can look up the addresses in gdb:
> gdb my-program-compiled-with-g-and-not-stripped
> (gdb) in
On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:53, 章宏九 wrote:
2009/9/24 Jonas Maebe :
I would like also to know the situation in C. (I mean
declaration of printf and scanf. Are they implemented in glibc or
gcc?)
In glibc.
Unlike pascal?
Yes and no. In both Pascal and C, the internal functionality of the
read/
On Thu, 2009-09-24 at 16:31 +0800, 章宏九 wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I just tried to unfairly compare fpc-compiled binary and gcc-compiled
> binary under my Gentoo box. FPC is incredible. `ps` data shows the fpc
> one costs nearly no memory? But I still notice it is a little slow. It
> usually costs 0.5~1.0 ti
2009/9/24 Jonas Maebe :
>
> On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:31, 章宏九 wrote:
>
>> I just tried to unfairly compare fpc-compiled binary and gcc-compiled
>> binary under my Gentoo box. FPC is incredible. `ps` data shows the fpc
>> one costs nearly no memory?
>
> The FPC run time library is much less extensive th
On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:37, Alexey Voytsehovich wrote:
On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:14, Alexey Voytsehovich wrote:
Do not prompt way to generate map file with line numbers in source
code? By analogy with Delphi. Since not get to the addresses in the
Call Stack to get a line in the source code.
Com
On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:31, 章宏九 wrote:
I just tried to unfairly compare fpc-compiled binary and gcc-compiled
binary under my Gentoo box. FPC is incredible. `ps` data shows the fpc
one costs nearly no memory?
The FPC run time library is much less extensive than the GNU C library
(e.g., it does
On Thu, 2009-09-24 at 11:14 +0300, Alexey Voytsehovich wrote:
> Do not prompt way to generate map file with line numbers in source code? By
> analogy with Delphi. Since not get to the addresses in the Call Stack to get
> a line in the source code.
When you compile with debuginfo on, (-gl) then
Hello Jonas,
Thursday, September 24, 2009, 11:33:29 AM, you wrote:
> On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:14, Alexey Voytsehovich wrote:
>> Do not prompt way to generate map file with line numbers in source
>> code? By analogy with Delphi. Since not get to the addresses in the
>> Call Stack to get a line
On 24 Sep 2009, at 10:14, Alexey Voytsehovich wrote:
Do not prompt way to generate map file with line numbers in source
code? By analogy with Delphi. Since not get to the addresses in the
Call Stack to get a line in the source code.
Compile your program with -gl to get line numbers next to
Hi.
I just tried to unfairly compare fpc-compiled binary and gcc-compiled
binary under my Gentoo box. FPC is incredible. `ps` data shows the fpc
one costs nearly no memory? But I still notice it is a little slow. It
usually costs 0.5~1.0 time more than the gcc one. It seems as if fpc
saves memory
Good day.
Do not prompt way to generate map file with line numbers in source code? By
analogy with Delphi. Since not get to the addresses in the Call Stack to get a
line in the source code.
Thanks in advance.
P.S.
Sorry for my English.
--
Best regards,
Alexey Voytsehovich
28 matches
Mail list logo
