> The reason the need for volatile on embedded systems is far
> less in FPC, is the existence of the "absolute" keyword.
> [...]
> Only if you would take the address
> of one of these variables and store it in a pointer,
> you would need "volatile" in this context.
Thanks for your detailed answe
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Dec 2015, R. Diez wrote:
> Maintaining your own independent compiler is hard, and I would have
> expected that FreePascal had turned to GCC or LLVM a long time ago.
Thank God that never happened (not as the first option anyway),
considering the state of the GNU toolchain on some p
On Wed, 16 Dec 2015 23:21:27 +0100, Jonas Maebe
wrote:
>
> As far as I know, Delphi only has errors and warnings. It does not have
> separate categories such as notes and hints, unlike FPC.
>
Delphi does have hints. But no notes.
--
Virgo Pärna
virgo.pa...@mail.ee
__
Yet again - as just confirmed in a follow-up e-mail of the original
poster, better keep him in Cc: of your responses.
Tomas
Original Message
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Lack of 'volatile' a serious issue. Any other
such caveats?
From:"M
In our previous episode, Jonas Maebe said:
> > (you also need it for variables you access from interrupt routines, as they
> > might change while a procedure is running)
>
> If they're global variables, which they presumably are, that's no more
> necessary than in the multi-threading case.
True
Mattias Gaertner wrote on Fri, 18 Dec 2015:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:30:00 +0100
Jonas Maebe wrote:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=807170#19
Does that mean the fpc 3.0.0 (rc-buggy) package only works on
debian unstable?
It should work on Debian experimental/rc-buggy and
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:30:00 +0100
Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> Mattias Gaertner wrote on Fri, 18 Dec 2015:
>
> > What could be the cause of this linker error:
> >
> > main.pp(6923,23) Warnung: Symbol "CommandLine" ist veraltet
> > /usr/bin/ld.bfd: warning: ../link.res contains output sections; did
marcov wrote on Fri, 18 Dec 2015:
In our previous episode, Jonas Maebe said:
The reason the need for volatile on embedded systems is far less in FPC,
is the existence of the "absolute" keyword. In C, you have to declare
[snip]
(you also need it for variables you access from interrupt routin
Mattias Gaertner wrote on Fri, 18 Dec 2015:
What could be the cause of this linker error:
main.pp(6923,23) Warnung: Symbol "CommandLine" ist veraltet
/usr/bin/ld.bfd: warning: ../link.res contains output sections; did
you forget -T?
/usr/bin/ld.bfd: /usr/lib/fpc/3.0.0/units/x86_64-linux/rtl/
In our previous episode, Jonas Maebe said:
> The reason the need for volatile on embedded systems is far less in FPC,
> is the existence of the "absolute" keyword. In C, you have to declare
> all of those memory mapped registers as volatile pointers, because
> otherwise things will get optimised
On Fri, December 18, 2015 09:59, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> R. Diez wrote:
Hello,
Please note that the original poster doesn't seem to be subscribed to the
list (in Cc: now).
Tomas
>> The only thing I found when searching for "FreePascal disadvantages" was
>> a general dislike of the Pascal languag
On 17/12/15 14:13, R. Diez wrote:
> Hi all:
>
[...]
>
> And there you go, I haven't quite started yet and I already
> discovered the first serious issue: there is no 'volatile' keyword.
> This matter has been brought up in the past, and it worries me that
> it has just been downplayed.
>
[...]
R. Diez wrote:
The only thing I found when searching for "FreePascal disadvantages" was
a general dislike of the Pascal language, which may be justified if
there are many more gotchas like this:
"for loop variable value reliable after loop?"
http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-pascal/2015
13 matches
Mail list logo
