Re: [fpc-devel] Issue with Critical sections
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 15:29, Sergei Gorelkin wrote:
That is exactly what I'm speaking about. Removing 'Windows' from
uses clause is essentially stopping using it :) And if the code
continues to compile and work after that, it is just fine.
Sorry, I always forget that most people are not like me and just use
subroutine names without caring where they come from, while I'm used to
always prefix the unit names to the subroutines and thus simply
removing Windows from the use clause would not work, because the
routines suddenly come from a different place.
Well, my opinion and my experience say you should know which routines
you are actually using. I know that since the days I used DisposeStr
and the FPC compiled code horribly crashed, because it was the wrong
one.
The code I was compiling was already cross-platform (Delphi/Kylix),
and 'uses Windows' was wrapped by {$IFDEF MSWINDOWS}. In Kylix,
InitializeCriticalSection and DeleteCriticalSection are implemented
in SysUtils unit, so any code using these functions continue to work
under Linux. It was surprise for me that this code could not compile
with FPC.
I won't judge if FPC is correct here (it's supposed to be Delphi-, not
Kylix-compatible), but if Borland decided to move those routines, they
didn't do it right neither. ;)
Well, I'd still suggest to either stick to System.InitCriticalSection
etc. regardless if the Windows unit is included or not (yes, this
actually *requires* you to prefix it), or just use the SyncObjs unit
like everyone else out there.
Vinzent.
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Issue with Critical sections
Sergei Gorelkin schrieb: Hello, I was porting to Linux some Windows code which uses critical sections API, and got 'Identifier not found' error on InitializeCriticalSection and DeleteCriticalSection symbols. After searching through RTL code, I discovered that abovementioned functions are named InitCriticalSection and DoneCriticalSection. At the same time, the EnterCriticalSection and LeaveCriticalSection are not renamed, so code using them compiles without errors. Why this inconsistency? Should I supply a patch that adds Initialize/DeleteCriticalSection as aliases for Init/DoneCriticalSection? Regards, Sergei ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel I reimplemented whole threading- and sync code in fpc RTL, including Threadvars. My patch is very very big and need to be discussed in core first. But all your problems will be solved. I hope I can start the discussion on core soon, but I know it will be endless. The user side of the RTL will 99% compatible to the old version, but there's a complete reimplementation required for the platfrom dependant code. Just stay on... -Ivo Steinmann ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Issue with Critical sections
On Thursday 05 April 2007 09:16, Sergei Gorelkin wrote: It appears that my way of thinking has been severely affected by using IDEs. When putting mouse over identifier shows where it comes from, prefixing seems redundant :) Prefixing *is* redundant, that's the whole point of it, but it also takes you to the safe side. I never liked Pascal's solution of calling subroutines with the same name depending on the order of the use clauses, when those use clauses are so far away from the actual code. Change the clause, you (may) change the code. Not mentioning this awful reuse clause here, that's the worst. But I'm getting carried away... stop. Well, so doing the mouseover to look at where it's from already has a bad taste of suspecting some surprise. And well, an IDE can't help you on the printout. Clicking on the headlines in a newspaper doesn't take you to the article, neither. ;) VH I won't judge if FPC is correct here (it's supposed to be Delphi-, not VH Kylix-compatible), but if Borland decided to move those routines, they VH didn't do it right neither. ;) They did not move routines - they just had to implement Linux versions somehow. And they did it in a way that was not breaking existing code. So they should have implemented the Windows unit, simple as that. Or add a Linux unit as replacement. In this particular case I wanted to avoid FCL dependence via using SyncObjs. Fair enough. It's a reason after all. Vinzent. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Issue with Critical sections
Thursday, April 05, 2007, 11:45:34 AM, Vinzent wrote: VH Sorry, I always forget that most people are not like me and just use VH subroutine names without caring where they come from, while I'm used to VH always prefix the unit names to the subroutines and thus simply VH removing Windows from the use clause would not work, because the VH routines suddenly come from a different place. VH Well, my opinion and my experience say you should know which routines VH you are actually using. I know that since the days I used DisposeStr VH and the FPC compiled code horribly crashed, because it was the wrong VH one. It appears that my way of thinking has been severely affected by using IDEs. When putting mouse over identifier shows where it comes from, prefixing seems redundant :) VH I won't judge if FPC is correct here (it's supposed to be Delphi-, not VH Kylix-compatible), but if Borland decided to move those routines, they VH didn't do it right neither. ;) They did not move routines - they just had to implement Linux versions somehow. And they did it in a way that was not breaking existing code. VH Well, I'd still suggest to either stick to System.InitCriticalSection VH etc. regardless if the Windows unit is included or not (yes, this VH actually *requires* you to prefix it), or just use the SyncObjs unit VH like everyone else out there. In this particular case I wanted to avoid FCL dependence via using SyncObjs. Ok, for now I have it fixed. Since Ivo has a large patch pending, I shall stay on... -- Best regards, Sergei ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Issue with Critical sections
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 10:33, Sergei Gorelkin wrote: I was porting to Linux some Windows code which uses critical sections API, and got 'Identifier not found' error on InitializeCriticalSection and DeleteCriticalSection symbols. If I had to guess, I'd say this is probably because those identifiers come from the Windows unit. After searching through RTL code, I discovered that abovementioned functions are named InitCriticalSection and DoneCriticalSection. At the same time, the EnterCriticalSection and LeaveCriticalSection are not renamed, so code using them compiles without errors. Why this inconsistency? Because one is the RTL abstraction on the different OSes, the other one is the direct Windows-API-Call. Should I supply a patch that adds Initialize/DeleteCriticalSection as aliases for Init/DoneCriticalSection? No, I'd suggest to fix your code. Regards, Vinzent. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Issue with Critical sections
Sergei Gorelkin wrote: But EnterCriticalSection/LeaveCriticalSection also exist in Windows API. And they are implemented in System unit without changing names. Therefore, to They shouldn't be exposed publicly in the system unit. Micha ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Issue with Critical sections
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 12:59, Sergei Gorelkin wrote: But EnterCriticalSection/LeaveCriticalSection also exist in Windows API. And they are implemented in System unit without changing names. Therefore, to make my code cross-platform, I have only to remove Windows from uses clause - then cross-platform versions from System unit will be used. This is fine. No. If you want to be cross-platform just do not use the Windows unit at all. Rather only use the functionality provided by the system unit, regardless of the compilation target. The Windows unit should generally only included if you write platform specific code and such code should be separated in its own include file or even unit anyway. Vinzent. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Issue with Critical sections
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 13:13, Micha Nelissen wrote: Sergei Gorelkin wrote: But EnterCriticalSection/LeaveCriticalSection also exist in Windows API. And they are implemented in System unit without changing names. Therefore, to They shouldn't be exposed publicly in the system unit. Why's that? At least it's documented that way. And I don't see any harm in doing so. Vinzent. ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Issue with Critical sections
Wednesday, April 04, 2007, 5:13:43 PM, Vinzent wrote:
VH On Wednesday 04 April 2007 12:59, Sergei Gorelkin wrote:
But EnterCriticalSection/LeaveCriticalSection also exist in Windows
API. And they are implemented in System unit without changing names.
Therefore, to make my code cross-platform, I have only to remove
Windows from uses clause - then cross-platform versions from System
unit will be used. This is fine.
VH No. If you want to be cross-platform just do not use the Windows unit
VH at all. Rather only use the functionality provided by the system unit,
VH regardless of the compilation target.
VH The Windows unit should generally only included if you write platform
VH specific code and such code should be separated in its own include file
VH or even unit anyway.
That is exactly what I'm speaking about. Removing 'Windows' from
uses clause is essentially stopping using it :) And if the code
continues to compile and work after that, it is just fine.
The code I was compiling was already cross-platform (Delphi/Kylix),
and 'uses Windows' was wrapped by {$IFDEF MSWINDOWS}. In Kylix,
InitializeCriticalSection and DeleteCriticalSection are implemented in
SysUtils unit, so any code using these functions continue to work
under Linux. It was surprise for me that this code could not compile
with FPC.
--
Best regards,
Sergei
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
Re: [fpc-devel] Issue with Critical sections
En/na Sergei Gorelkin ha escrit:
The code I was compiling was already cross-platform (Delphi/Kylix),
and 'uses Windows' was wrapped by {$IFDEF MSWINDOWS}. In Kylix,
InitializeCriticalSection and DeleteCriticalSection are implemented in
SysUtils unit, so any code using these functions continue to work
under Linux. It was surprise for me that this code could not compile
with FPC.
Any reason why not to use syncobjs? (I'm just curious, since that's the
unit I used when I needed critical sections).
Bye
--
Luca
A: Because it destroys the flow of the conversation
Q: Why is it bad?
A: No, it's bad.
Q: Should I top post in replies to mailing lists?
___
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
