On Tue, 3 May 2005, zephod wrote:
Dear,
I am evaluating fpc as a possible replacement compiler for a large kylix
based
source tree (~200.000 lines of code). In porting the apps I encountered some
small troubles:
* packages/base/libc/aineth.inc:
inp argument of inet_aton should be var instead of in_addr pointer
since the memory it refers to should exist and be valid at calling time.
So why not let the compiler do the check for you?
Added as overloaded call.
* packages/base/libc/nudph.inc :
typo in libc.pp. It includes the file nupdh.inc (notice the swap
of 'p' and 'd' chars), which contains no code. Maybe it is best that
nupdh.inc is moved to the attic to avoid future mistakes.
Done.
* packages/base/libc/nip.inc :
iphdr and ip records have wrong size (24 bytes instead of 20). The
first two C fields (version and ihl) are 4 bit integers contained in the
first byte of the record.
So instead of declaring flag0 as a word or dword, the type should
be plain byte.
Hm. The first I checked, and is declared in Kylix' Libc also with Cardinal
But the linux header file says
unsigned int ip_hl:4; /* header length */
unsigned int ip_v:4;/* version */
So I'm assuming that these 2 have total size 8, so a byte should be ok.
(sizes are indeed 20, as reported by GCC)
Changed accordingly.
* What about send and recv calls in ssocketh.inc? The buffer could be an
untyped var instead of a regular pointer (Giving nil as buffer argument,
although not prohibited by libc, makes no sense imho)
Added as overloaded calls.
Regardless of all this, I'd be interested in knowing your assessment of
FPC (be it good or bad). From your email addres I'd say you are Belgian, so
I'm double interested (want to know what future FPC has in this country).
I'd be grateful if you'd send me a private mail with a more detailed assessment
(if company policy permits, that is)
Michael.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
