Re: [fpc-pascal] Lack of 'volatile' a serious issue. Any other such caveats?

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. > [...]

Re: [fpc-pascal] Linker error

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:

Re: [fpc-pascal] Lack of 'volatile' a serious issue. Any other such caveats?

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?"

Re: [fpc-pascal] Linker error

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

Re: [fpc-pascal] Linker error

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

Re: [fpc-pascal] Blockread blockwrite var vs out parameters

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

Re: [fpc-pascal] Lack of 'volatile' a serious issue. Any other such caveats?

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.

[fpc-pascal] Fwd: Re: Lack of 'volatile' a serious issue. Any other such caveats?

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:

Re: [fpc-pascal] Lack of 'volatile' a serious issue. Any other such caveats?

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

Re: [fpc-pascal] Lack of 'volatile' a serious issue. Any other such caveats?

> 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