Hello Everyone,
While I can't honestly say I share any enthusiasm for writing a OS in
FreePascal, I do think there is merit in looking for projects of similar
scope and interest that can demonstrate the power of the language and the
tremendous tools that have been developed by this group over the
Hello
I don't mean to start a culture war here, but I think there is a bit of
overstatement in this post that 'C' is somehow a better language for writing
an OS in than say Pascal or OP or anything else.
In point of fact, the only 'best' language for any processor is its own
machine code which is
g
platforms<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_%28computing%29>
.
Prince
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 7:57 PM, Prince Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello
>
> I don't mean to start a culture war here, but I think there is a bit of
> overstatement in this post that '
Link to the article about the AT&T UNIX OS and C
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Prince Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is a direct reference from the Wikipedia article I referenced in my
> prior post ...
>
> In 1973, Unix
Hello
I have read on the wiki that FP supports ARM.. which I find very
interesting..
After reading the manuals I see that FP uses the GNU tools as back-ends and
they support ARM ... but it that the extent of the support here.
For example, the ASM directive in FP targets the IA33 processor
semanti
directive within the FP syntax is implemented to use ARM register
and assembler sematics/syntax which the GNU Assembler assumes will be set by
the language 'front end'
Thanks
Prince
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> On 06 Dec 2008
Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> On 07 Dec 2008, at 00:30, Prince Riley wrote:
>
> A few additional points if I may ..
>>
>> When you say the FP supports the ARM architecture my specific question is
>> how does FP 'inform' the GNU assembler back e
08 at 4:53 PM, Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>
> On 07 Dec 2008, at 23:01, Prince Riley wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 3:11 PM, Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >wrote:
>>
>> On 07 Dec 2008, at 00:30, Prince Riley wrote:
>>>
&g
Hello
Like ti weigh in on this thread in the discussion regarding increasing the
GUI-ness of FP.
Has anyone looked into writing an Eclipse plug-in for FP (as an was done for
Python and Ruby)?
Given the huge base of Eclipse users this might be a way to reach the goal
with both a better developer t
Sorry to everyone for replying so far down the thread to the points
mentioned earlier.
The FPC ARM support is stated as ' does not specify an ARM architecture' ...
fine ..but there is a major issue there that needs clarification and better
documentation.
Is it really safe to have no way to target
then, as I have up to now, I asked which assembler code option (
meaning -- which ARM architecture --) did FP support.
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Jonas Maebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> On 08 Dec 2008, at 20:43, Prince Riley wrote:
>
> What I keep asking here and not gett
Marc,
Just wanted to say thank you for that info.. much obliged.
Prince
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Marc Santhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Am Montag, den 08.12.2008, 13:43 -0600 schrieb Prince Riley:
> > Perhaps the person who coded that support into FP can write back an
Bee --
You make a very excellent point in your post and one that I think doesn't
get repeated loudly enough into the ears of the Embarcadero folks. Maybe its
time for an open letter posted to
these kinds of lists and sending their president a e-mail with the link to
read the comments for himself.
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In our previous episode, Prince Riley said:
> >
> > Like ti weigh in on this thread in the discussion regarding increasing
> the
> > GUI-ness of FP.
>
> > Has anyone looked into writing an Eclipse plug-in for FP (as an was done
> for
&
Jurgen and Bee made a few rich contrasting points about Borland's past
mistakes. However, we must acknowledge that Borland's biggest problem was
Borland persisten failure to deliver 'price competitive' and 'high value'
programming tools.
No one denies Borland's well earned reputation for innovatio
ys
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 8:07 PM, Prince Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Eclipse was first released as a Java development IDE several years ago,
> but
> > if you take a look at the Eclipse web site www.eclipse.org you'll
I think others to this list may have seen my prior post on how this
'challenge' of writing a OS kernel in Object Pascal could be met using the
Unix/Linux history as a guide.
It probably wouldn't be worth the additional effort needed to write the
entire kernel in Object Pascal in much the same way
Hello
Has anyone used or attempted to use Indy with FPC... and if so how did you
incorporate the Indy components.
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Mattias Gaertner <
nc-gaert...@netcologne.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:39:18 +0100
> Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > hopefully
Travis,
I am joining this discussion fairly late so if you've found your solution
already please ignore this post.
First, upon reading you feel Irie Pascal is 'optimized' for CGI execution on
OSX (Leopard?) my first question is how are you defining that. I've looked
over the Irie code just now (u
x27;t know whether it can
be tweaked in some way to support the REST protocol for an application like
yours.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Francisco Reyes wrote:
> Prince Riley writes:
>
> Finally, give the advance from CGI based web apps to Web 2.0 (Javascript
>> running in the b
essing load (Web server Request/Response), response
> time, DB transaction processing load, etc. I also don't know whether it can
> be tweaked in some way to support the REST protocol for an application like
> yours.
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Francisco Reyes wrote:
>
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:44 PM, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> Op dinsdag 03-03-2009 om 12:30 uur [tijdzone -0600], schreef Prince
> Riley:
>
> > Primarily the reason why is -- especially for DB web applications --
> > is efficiency, maintainability, and scalability. The recen
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:33 AM, Michael Van Canneyt
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Prince Riley wrote:
>
> > Joost
> >
> > Reading the responses on this discussion thread, it appears the
> 'religious
> > war' you mentioned in your prior post wa
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 5:31 AM, Dariusz Mazur wrote:
> Prince Riley pisze:
>
>> Since the discussion in this thread has advanced pretty far along toward
>> recommending a FP and Powtils solution to you, then it appears you have a
>> technical answer from the group you ca
Hello
I just checked the list on FreeBSD kernel group on the AMD64 port.. and the
answer is maybe.. A more definitive answer might be available soon I was
told. There is still some delay on the QC for the 2.2.4 RC1 that hasn't been
completed and the person doing that QC wasn't answering with a dat
If anything breaks before then, I'll send you word on the RC...
Prince
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:04 PM, Francisco Reyes wrote:
> Prince Riley writes:
>
> Thanks for the reply.
>
>> I just checked the list on FreeBSD kernel group on the AMD64 port.
>>
>
> The
It would seem that its probably best we take some time and try to spec out,
test, and the publish the steps to follow since I've been interested in a
port like this as well.
Can we use the steps followed to port PFC to the MacOS hardware platform
when it was non-Intel?
Should be be looking at a
Jonas,
Sorry to but in, but I read this post and followed the link to the binutils
problem you mentioned in your reply.
Is it possible the error message, "Can't call the linker,..." is the result
of a bad/missing symlink and not the problem in binutils?
I have Ubuntu 9.04 desktop now but haven't
Jonas,
Thanks for taking the time to reply Jonas. When I get Ubuntu 9.04 installed
this weekend I'll shoot you an e-mail confirming the version of binutils it
has ...
Prince
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> On 24 Apr 2009, at 23:28, Prince Riley wrote:
>
&
;
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
>>
>> On 24 Apr 2009, at 23:28, Prince Riley wrote:
>>
>> Sorry to but in, but I read this post and followed the link to the
>>> binutils
>>> problem you mentioned in your reply.
>>> Is it pos
The current .DEB lazarus-ide_0.9.26.2-0_i386.deb available from the
Sourceforge repository reports a dependency error when I attempt to run it
on Ubuntu 8.04. The error reads, "Error: Dependency is not satisfiable:
libxi6"
What makes this vexing is the installer reports a dependency error when in
o resolve the situation:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
lazarus-ide: Depends: libxi6 (>= 2:1.1.3-1ubuntu3) but 2:1.1.3-1 is to be
installed
E: Broken packages
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Prince Riley wrote:
> The current .DEB lazarus-ide_0.9.26.2-0_i386.deb available from
Matthias,
You might want to take a look at the thread (see below) on this I found
On 10/15/06, Marco van de Voort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Florian, afaik Sebastian already had DBus stuff. He demonstrated it in
Muenchen?
Arg, duplicated work?
Well ... he should have written somewhere tha
Hello,
There seems to be a bigger issue on this... but perhaps someone else confirm
that the following programs, similar to the failing one, work.
program test1;
var
p: Pointer;
begin
p := nil;
p := p + 1;
end.
Does work and the following program
program test2;
var
f addressable memory for the CPU architecture
(bytes on Intel).
However, even in C, the closest equivalent expression to 'p := nil + 1',
void *p, is 'p = NULL, p = p + 1' works (compiles) but issues a warning
about the 'p = p + 1' expression (GCC v4).
On Mon, May 2
literal, not two. So
unless I misunderstand you, or there's some run-time evaluation, shouldn't
this expression be valid? (but I still worry about how the compiler would
assign the correct type to the pointer (is it a valid address).
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Jonas Ma
ter
requires considerable thought for reasons of portability and ensuring that
pointer arithmetic doesn't become a source of opaque bugs.
Prince
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Jonas Maebe wrote:
>
> On 25 May 2009, at 22:39, Prince Riley wrote:
>
> That's a very interesting a
eir values are set, incremented, and dereferenced
will demonstrate how challenging even a simple pointer handling model can
be.
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Frank Peelo wrote:
> Prince Riley wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>
>>
>> "The reserved wor
ression (p = NULL +
p) and (p = 0 + p) which is similar to the case we are talking abotu here.
So here is our questiuon: should FP allow the expression (p := nil + p)? If
so, what should the result be? I opt that FP should treat it as an invalid
expression (compile error) and not as a valid express
Hello Roland
Thanks for the committ andd the tar ball.. I've set aside next weekend to
explore and begin testing it. Perhpas others in the group are like me and
putting the tarball on their 'To-Do' list.
Prince
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Roland Schaefer <
roland.schae...@fu-berlin.de> wrot
Hinnack --
Do you think the Indy team would welcome some assistance with the MacOS
version of Indy 10. I am def ineterested in Indy 10
on MacOS (Snow Leopard)
Prince
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Henrik Genssen <
henrik.gens...@mediafactory.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the indy people seem only to
41 matches
Mail list logo
