Re: Re[2]: [fpc-pascal] fpc and intel vtune (now about gprof)
I hope you can see the difference between a linker, which is needed no matte how you want to use the compiler, and a tool like Valgrind or gprof. VS With this difference, compiling -gv succeeds, even if Valgrind is not VS installed. Compiling -pg fails, if gprof/cygwin is not installed. VS One might argue, that this is a good thing, compiling with -pg without VS having gprof is useless anyway. What is better? 1. immediate access violation crash with -gd -- well, I wouldn't use dbx in win32 anyway Already fixed in 2.1.1 and now also in 2.03 so this is a non-issue. 2. confusing linker error cannot find -lc with -pg -- well, I can't use gprof without cygwin anyhow (while gprof.exe itself does not use extras except shipped cygwin1.dll) It is not confusing. It is expected that you know what you are doing when using low-level tools like gprof for profiling. 3. successful build with -gv -- well, I can say that my file is bigger! (but valgrind is not going to support win32) It is clear the -g already generates debuginfo only. The 'v' adapts it for valgrind. So it is obvious that the .exe is bigger. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re[2]: [fpc-pascal] fpc and intel vtune (now about gprof)
Sorry, eight questions ahead (first two are important to me). -Original Message- From: Florian Klaempfl [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Пётр Косаревский [EMAIL PROTECTED],FPC-Pascal users discussions fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 09:57:55 +0200 Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] fpc and intel vtune Remark: of course I don't ask here for vtune support, I ask about FPC tools. As far as I know, FPC does not have any profiler under win32 without cygwin. Last time I used gprof on win32, it worked fine? Well, not long ago I was told in these maillists, that gprof requires cygwin under win32 for FPC. Is it normal, that compiler (linking stage) tells: ...ld.exe: cannot find -lc and fails? (I thought about installing cygwin, but I don't understand what do I need from it.) Is it supposed, that I integrate cygwin with FPC or something? Is it normal, that FPC from almost fresh base_w32... and fpc-2.0.3.i386-win32... required as.exe and ld.exe (I copied them from slightly older ones)? Is it OK, that after recent FPC update I have to add -Sg for my pretty GOTO (It is objfpc mode, no extra option is required under Delphi)? Is it normal, that with e.g. -va switch I see verbosely what was processed before -va switch? Should I bump the fixed bug about uncommented compiler option -Op4 (it is uncommented in both 2.0.3 and 2.1.x versions)? Is it sufficient to build 2.1.x and rename one of fpc.exe to operate both release and development versions (I didn't try, but it seems that the one ppc386 would be run)? Should I split this message? ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: Re[2]: [fpc-pascal] fpc and intel vtune (now about gprof)
đŁÔŇ ëĎÓÁŇĹ×ÓËÉĘ wrote:
Sorry, eight questions ahead (first two are important to me).
.
.
Last time I used gprof on win32, it worked fine?
Well, not long ago I was told in these maillists, that gprof requires
cygwin under win32 for FPC.
Is it normal, that compiler (linking stage) tells: ...ld.exe: cannot find
-lc and fails? (I thought about installing cygwin, but I don't understand
what do I need from it.)
Just guessing here: Most probably libc.dll? Better to be answered by
someone else.
Is it supposed, that I integrate cygwin with FPC or something?
No, except that you have to provide its runtime libraries.
Is it normal, that FPC from almost fresh base_w32... and
fpc-2.0.3.i386-win32... required as.exe and ld.exe (I copied them from
slightly older ones)?
I'd say so - if you're talking about snapshots, these tools are not
included in them (as opposed to releases).
Is it OK, that after recent FPC update I have to add -Sg for my pretty
GOTO (It is objfpc mode, no extra option is required under Delphi)?
Use -Mdelphi (or {MODE DELPHI}) if you want compatibility to Delphi. Use
of GOTO (and some other constructs supported by Delphi) isn't considered a
good programming practice, so it isn't supported by default in native FPC
modes. If you want to use GOTO in these modes, you need to supply -Sg
explicitely.
Is it normal, that with e.g. -va switch I see verbosely what was
processed before -va switch?
I'm not sure if I understand what you meant here?
Should I bump the fixed bug about uncommented compiler option -Op4 (it
is uncommented in both 2.0.3 and 2.1.x versions)?
I guess it would help to be more specific here - what exactly is wrong,
please?
Is it sufficient to build 2.1.x and rename one of fpc.exe to operate
both release and development versions (I didn't try, but it seems that the
one ppc386 would be run)?
That depends. It could work if you provide proper fpc.cfg in the compiler
directory (and no other fpc.cfg exists in other directories) and if you
make sure to use different output directories for compilation of your own
units.
Should I split this message?
Not necessarily if you don't mind receiving answers in many pieces
(different people responding to different parts). ;-)
Regards
Tomas
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re[2]: [fpc-pascal] fpc and intel vtune (now about gprof)
I hope you can see the difference between a linker, which is needed no matte how you want to use the compiler, and a tool like Valgrind or gprof. VS With this difference, compiling -gv succeeds, even if Valgrind is not VS installed. Compiling -pg fails, if gprof/cygwin is not installed. VS One might argue, that this is a good thing, compiling with -pg without VS having gprof is useless anyway. What is better? 1. immediate access violation crash with -gd -- well, I wouldn't use dbx in win32 anyway 2. confusing linker error cannot find -lc with -pg -- well, I can't use gprof without cygwin anyhow (while gprof.exe itself does not use extras except shipped cygwin1.dll) 3. successful build with -gv -- well, I can say that my file is bigger! (but valgrind is not going to support win32) (As I think, intentional rejecting an option should obviously depend on target system rather than the current one and keep in mind, that if it is theoretically possible, that debugger [or something] will support that system, such a ban would seem really strange) What about user friendly filelist I mentioned? JM You're free to make it and we'll happily include it. JM Jonas Probably I will try to write it for win32-i386-fpc2.0.3 next week, but I can only depend on searching binaries (only unpacked ones) or sources for text occurances. So, I will normally (without some web surfing or something) not know, whether this or that packed ???.exe from third party (i.e. without sources in FPC package) uses this or that third party library file. Also, there are obsolete hints in sources to be filtered out... ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
