Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal



On Thu, 14 Mar 2024, Florian Klämpfl via fpc-pascal wrote:


Still, it is more logical to place it under utils, with the rest of the
programs.

The argument about the time to compile seems simply false to me:

If you consider the FPC toplevel 'make all' as the only command to
issue, then you may win some time, although I doubt it will be that much.

But 99% of the time, you don't need to recompile the utilities.


I do always a make all as it takes only a few more seconds than a make 
cycle and then I am sure everything builds.


You must have a very fast PC, here the difference is very measurable.

1:06 for a 'make cycle'
2:05 for a toplevel 'make all'.

So almost a minute difference. This is with -j 4 and the according fpmakeopt.


I certainly do not:
I usually do a make cycle followed by a compilation of the rtl/packages 
with debug info.


So if we moved the IDE to utils where it logically belongs, I would 
actually be winning time, contrary to the argument for having it in 
packages.


As I moved it, my thinking was that it is not really a utility but a 
package (in particular in the sense of the installer). And having 
executables is also the case for other packages.


Here I differ in opinion: Normally packages do not constitute a program.
If that was the criterium, all utils could be put in the packages directory.

It may be that some packages have a demo program, but the package itself is
normally just a set of units. I know of no package other that is a program.
chm has some tools but IMO they are also misplaced and should be in utils.

So the IDE - for me - is definitely a utility. Given the times indicated above,
it would make a considerable difference to move it.

Michael.___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Florian Klämpfl via fpc-pascal

Am 14.03.2024 um 11:04 schrieb Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal:



On Thu, 14 Mar 2024, Karoly Balogh via fpc-pascal wrote:


Hi,

On Thu, 14 Mar 2024, Guillermo Martínez Jiménez via fpc-pascal wrote:


I thought "packages" were libraries not applications, as there is an
"utils" directory with programs.


I agree, I'm also not very fond of the IDE being in packages, but most of
the team considers it a legacy piece of code (which it is, no argument
there), and at least this way it doesn't need constant special treatment,
unlike when it was in the root folder of the repo under "ide". It's less
"in the way".


Still, it is more logical to place it under utils, with the rest of the
programs.

The argument about the time to compile seems simply false to me:

If you consider the FPC toplevel 'make all' as the only command to
issue, then you may win some time, although I doubt it will be that much.

But 99% of the time, you don't need to recompile the utilities.


I do always a make all as it takes only a few more seconds than a make 
cycle and then I am sure everything builds.




I certainly do not:
I usually do a make cycle followed by a compilation of the rtl/packages 
with debug info.


So if we moved the IDE to utils where it logically belongs, I would 
actually be winning time, contrary to the argument for having it in 
packages.


As I moved it, my thinking was that it is not really a utility but a 
package (in particular in the sense of the installer). And having 
executables is also the case for other packages.




To me it therefore seems a better idea to move the IDE to utils, and to 
have a

toplevel make command that does the same as 'make all' simply without the
utilities. Or have a 'NOUTILS=1' define.

It increases build time if one want to test that everything builds with 
no real gain and being not a utility?

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal




On Thu, 14 Mar 2024, Tomas Hajny via fpc-pascal wrote:


On 2024-03-14 11:06, Marco van de Voort via fpc-pascal wrote:

Op 14-3-2024 om 11:04 schreef Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal:



To me it therefore seems a better idea to move the IDE to utils, and to 
have a

toplevel make command that does the same as 'make all' simply without the
utilities. Or have a 'NOUTILS=1' define.


Or let fpmake simply build the union of packages and utils in
parallel. So separate directories, but one build stage


Well, whatever. I remember having raised the same question in the past 
(indeed - on the 5th of February 2020 at 1:30am ;-) on the core list) and 
this is what I got... I even explicity raised the point also mentioned by 
Michael now (quoting my follow-up mail on the same day):


"OK, that would be addressed in case of inclusion under utils as well. Even 
more so, actually - users who want to recompile packages for whatever reason 
(e.g. to have debug information included as discussed here recently ;-) ) 
aren't probably interested in waiting for rebuilding of the IDE at all."


However, Michael refused to move it to utils at that point in time in order 
not to delay the release. ;-)


Given the delay we're experiencing on 3.2.4, my refusal was not without reason 
:-)

However, if there is agreement to do so, maybe we can move it in trunk.

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Marco van de Voort via fpc-pascal


Op 14-3-2024 om 11:52 schreef Tomas Hajny via fpc-pascal:



"OK, that would be addressed in case of inclusion under utils as well. 
Even more so, actually - users who want to recompile packages for 
whatever reason (e.g. to have debug information included as discussed 
here recently ;-) ) aren't probably interested in waiting for 
rebuilding of the IDE at all."


However, Michael refused to move it to utils at that point in time in 
order not to delay the release. ;-)


Note that I don't feel very strong about moving it to utils, frankly I 
don't care. There is also the matter than the IDE is not the only one 
generating installed programs, some other packages (like package CHM) 
that also generate binaries, would have to be split then (!?!?)


My point was more that _if_ it is to be moved, parallel compilation 
should be retained, and I gave a possible direction


Major buildsystem work is preferably done just before a new major 
release branch is split off trunk, but by then 3.2.0 was probably 
already branched off.   Rearrangements during a release cycle makes 
merging back to fixes hard for a long period.



___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Tomas Hajny via fpc-pascal

On 2024-03-14 11:06, Marco van de Voort via fpc-pascal wrote:

Op 14-3-2024 om 11:04 schreef Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal:



To me it therefore seems a better idea to move the IDE to utils, and 
to have a
toplevel make command that does the same as 'make all' simply without 
the

utilities. Or have a 'NOUTILS=1' define.


Or let fpmake simply build the union of packages and utils in
parallel. So separate directories, but one build stage


Well, whatever. I remember having raised the same question in the past 
(indeed - on the 5th of February 2020 at 1:30am ;-) on the core list) 
and this is what I got... I even explicity raised the point also 
mentioned by Michael now (quoting my follow-up mail on the same day):


"OK, that would be addressed in case of inclusion under utils as well. 
Even more so, actually - users who want to recompile packages for 
whatever reason (e.g. to have debug information included as discussed 
here recently ;-) ) aren't probably interested in waiting for rebuilding 
of the IDE at all."


However, Michael refused to move it to utils at that point in time in 
order not to delay the release. ;-)


Tomas
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Marco van de Voort via fpc-pascal



Op 14-3-2024 om 11:04 schreef Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal:



To me it therefore seems a better idea to move the IDE to utils, and 
to have a

toplevel make command that does the same as 'make all' simply without the
utilities. Or have a 'NOUTILS=1' define.

Or let fpmake simply build the union of packages and utils in parallel. 
So separate directories, but one build stage

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Michael Van Canneyt via fpc-pascal



On Thu, 14 Mar 2024, Karoly Balogh via fpc-pascal wrote:


Hi,

On Thu, 14 Mar 2024, Guillermo Martínez Jiménez via fpc-pascal wrote:


I thought "packages" were libraries not applications, as there is an
"utils" directory with programs.


I agree, I'm also not very fond of the IDE being in packages, but most of
the team considers it a legacy piece of code (which it is, no argument
there), and at least this way it doesn't need constant special treatment,
unlike when it was in the root folder of the repo under "ide". It's less
"in the way".


Still, it is more logical to place it under utils, with the rest of the
programs.

The argument about the time to compile seems simply false to me:

If you consider the FPC toplevel 'make all' as the only command to
issue, then you may win some time, although I doubt it will be that much.

But 99% of the time, you don't need to recompile the utilities.

I certainly do not:
I usually do a make cycle followed by a compilation of the rtl/packages with 
debug info.

So if we moved the IDE to utils where it logically belongs, 
I would actually be winning time, contrary to the argument for having it in packages.


To me it therefore seems a better idea to move the IDE to utils, and to have a
toplevel make command that does the same as 'make all' simply without the
utilities. Or have a 'NOUTILS=1' define.

Michael.___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Karoly Balogh via fpc-pascal
Hi,

On Thu, 14 Mar 2024, Guillermo Martínez Jiménez via fpc-pascal wrote:

> I thought "packages" were libraries not applications, as there is an
> "utils" directory with programs.

I agree, I'm also not very fond of the IDE being in packages, but most of
the team considers it a legacy piece of code (which it is, no argument
there), and at least this way it doesn't need constant special treatment,
unlike when it was in the root folder of the repo under "ide". It's less
"in the way".

However, Free Vision, and with that the ASCII table and mouse handling was
always (or for a very long time) in packages. :)

Charlie___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Tomas Hajny via fpc-pascal

On 2024-03-14 09:34, Guillermo Martínez Jiménez via fpc-pascal wrote:

Thanks, Karoly and Marco.

I thought "packages" were libraries not applications, as there is an
"utils" directory with programs.


Well, yes, it's somewhat confusing admittedly. The IDE sources used to 
be located at the higher level (i.e. next to the packages, rtl, etc.) in 
the past. They were moved to packages as part of the transition to using 
fpmake for compilation of most of FPC sources in order to allow having 
it compiled in parallel to other big packages (since IDE is probably the 
biggest one taking the longest time to compile). Having it in packages 
allows compiling it in parallel to other packages; since utils are 
compiled independently (and much quicker), moving IDE in utils would 
result in longer compilation time overall (if parallel compilation is 
allowed).


Tomas




El Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:45:19 +0100
Marco van de Voort via fpc-pascal 
escribió:

Op 13-3-2024 om 21:34 schreef Karoly Balogh via fpc-pascal:
> H
>
> Where are they?  Why aren't with the official source packages?
> But they are. The IDE code is here:
> https://gitlab.com/freepascal.org/fpc/source/-/tree/main/packages/ide
>
> It also depends on Free Vision, which is here:
> https://gitlab.com/freepascal.org/fpc/source/-/tree/main/packages/fv
>
> The ASCII table code is part of Free Vision, and it's here:
> 
https://gitlab.com/freepascal.org/fpc/source/-/blob/main/packages/fv/src/asciitab.pas
>
And the mouse-keyboard-video drivers are in package rtl-console, e.g.
for windows


https://gitlab.com/freepascal.org/fpc/source/-/tree/main/packages/rtl-console/src/win

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Marco van de Voort via fpc-pascal


Op 14-3-2024 om 09:34 schreef Guillermo Martínez Jiménez via fpc-pascal:

Thanks, Karoly and Marco.

I thought "packages" were libraries not applications, as there is an
"utils" directory with programs.


Roughly the RTL is a base set of units needed for the compiler itself. 
When the compiler bootstraps it is compiled several times.


Most units not needed for the compiler have thus moved out into packages 
that is not compiled multiple time, and directories in packages/ can be 
compiled in parallel to some degree.


___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Re: [fpc-pascal] FP IDE sources

2024-03-14 Thread Guillermo Martínez Jiménez via fpc-pascal
Thanks, Karoly and Marco.

I thought "packages" were libraries not applications, as there is an
"utils" directory with programs.

Thankyou again,
Guillermo Martínez.

El Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:45:19 +0100
Marco van de Voort via fpc-pascal 
escribió:
> Op 13-3-2024 om 21:34 schreef Karoly Balogh via fpc-pascal:
> > H
> >
> > Where are they?  Why aren't with the official source packages?
> > But they are. The IDE code is here:
> > https://gitlab.com/freepascal.org/fpc/source/-/tree/main/packages/ide
> >
> > It also depends on Free Vision, which is here:
> > https://gitlab.com/freepascal.org/fpc/source/-/tree/main/packages/fv
> >
> > The ASCII table code is part of Free Vision, and it's here:
> > https://gitlab.com/freepascal.org/fpc/source/-/blob/main/packages/fv/src/asciitab.pas
> >  
> And the mouse-keyboard-video drivers are in package rtl-console, e.g. 
> for windows
> 
> 
> https://gitlab.com/freepascal.org/fpc/source/-/tree/main/packages/rtl-console/src/win
> 
> ___
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
> https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal