Jonas Maebe schrieb: > > On 22 Feb 2008, at 09:32, Florian Klaempfl wrote: > >> GDB is written in C, even worse it is written in a 80th hackish style >> using tons of macros. Most advanced pascal programmers can read it but >> writing or even debugging is another matter. > > It is not /that/ hard to debug
But it is hard for people knowing C not that well but knowing pascal, that's what I meant. Would you ever have be able to contribute to fpc if the compiler had been written in C (yes, I did a prototype in C in '93 because I wanted a 32 Bit compiler to bootstrap :) )? Luckily enough I got the money to buy BP7 so I could use at least PM to have enough memory, this was before I got the idea to abuse TEMSStream to store symbols :) > >> Compiling gdb as any gcc >> written software is a nightmare especially on non unix. > > > On unix (at least on Linux and Mac OS X) it is trivial to compile > (./configure ; make). Yes, and then you can go drinking 3 cups of coffee ;) even using a modern machine and not considering the unix centric approach it uses. If you've bad luck, make distclean doesn't clean everything, happens regularily, and you need to create a patch of your changes, re-unpack the sources and apply your patch. > It doesn't have any unusual external dependencies, > pretty much everything that's required is included in the gdb source > tree itself. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
