Working on my arm-linux cross compiler (which used to at least build a
compiler etc), I currently hit this with fpc trunk:
C:/development/fpctrunk/compiler/ppcrossarm.exe -Tlinux -Parm
-XParm-linux- -Xr -Ur -Xs -O2 -n -Fuarm -Fusystems
-FuC:/development/fpctrunk/rtl/units/arm-linux -Fiarm
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 3:31 AM, leledumbo leledumbo_c...@yahoo.co.id wrote:
As in the data structure theory, a tree is just a graph without cycle.
So I guess it should be made that way. There are a lot of graph and tree
variations though, so I think I need to take some time to design before
First, thanks to all involved in documenting the existing FPC trunk
Unicode situation on the wiki. Exactly the kind of docs I was looking for!
I'm trying to avoid ambiguity for an UTF8 (without BOM) encoded file and
tried this:
{$ifdef fpc}
//Explicitly specify this is an UTF8 encoded file.
-Message d'origine-
De : fpc-pascal-boun...@lists.freepascal.org [mailto:fpc-pascal-
boun...@lists.freepascal.org] De la part de Reinier Olislagers
Envoyé : mercredi 8 janvier 2014 13:58
À : FPC Mailing list
Objet : [fpc-pascal] Is it just me or... trunk cross compile failure on
On 08/01/2014 16:40, Pierre Free Pascal wrote:
-Message d'origine-
Objet : [fpc-pascal] Is it just me or... trunk cross compile failure on
arm-linux
C:\development\cross\bin\arm-linux\arm-linux-ld.exe: cannot find
arm\units\arm-linux\pexpr.o
pp.pas(238,36) Error: Error while linking
On 08 Jan 2014, at 15:58, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
I'm trying to avoid ambiguity for an UTF8 (without BOM) encoded file
and
tried this:
{$ifdef fpc}
//Explicitly specify this is an UTF8 encoded file.
//Alternative would be UTF8 with BOM but writing UTF8 BOM is bad
practice.
//See
-Message d'origine-
De : fpc-pascal-boun...@lists.freepascal.org [mailto:fpc-pascal-
boun...@lists.freepascal.org] De la part de Reinier Olislagers
Envoyé : mercredi 8 janvier 2014 17:05
À : FPC Mailing list
Objet : Re: [fpc-pascal] Is it just me or... trunk cross compile
failure
Am 08.01.2014 17:08 schrieb Reinier Olislagers
reinierolislag...@gmail.com:
Mmm, interesting. Seems opposite on trunk. -CaEABI works; -CaEABIHF
fails (I'm using current trunk as a starting compiler)
*sigh* I thought you were one of those who already knows this, but it seems
not: *ALWAYS*
Today I found
this type definition in some FreePascal sources:
Type
Real = type Double;
I wondered
what
On 08/01/2014 17:17, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 08 Jan 2014, at 15:58, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
I'm trying to avoid ambiguity for an UTF8 (without BOM) encoded file and
tried this:
{$ifdef fpc}
//Explicitly specify this is an UTF8 encoded file.
//Alternative would be UTF8 with BOM but
On 08/01/2014 18:01, Pierre Free Pascal wrote:
-Message d'origine-
De : fpc-pascal-boun...@lists.freepascal.org [mailto:fpc-pascal-
boun...@lists.freepascal.org] De la part de Reinier Olislagers
Envoyé : mercredi 8 janvier 2014 17:05
À : FPC Mailing list
Objet : Re: [fpc-pascal]
On 08/01/2014 19:00, Sven Barth wrote:
*sigh* I thought you were one of those who already knows this, but it
seems not: *ALWAYS* compile using the last release as starting compiler.
I do know this and...
We won't provide support if a trunk version (be it a non-released fixes
or the main dev
On 08/01/2014 18:16, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Today I found this type definition in some FreePascal sources:
TypeReal =type Double;
I wondered what the second “type” keyword means here (I have never seen
this before).
You are being rather obtuse.
Ignore the diagrams in the docs if they
Reinier Olislagers reinierolislag...@gmail.com schrieb:
On 08/01/2014 18:01, Pierre Free Pascal wrote:
-Message d'origine-
De : fpc-pascal-boun...@lists.freepascal.org [mailto:fpc-pascal-
boun...@lists.freepascal.org] De la part de Reinier Olislagers
Envoyé : mercredi 8 janvier
On 08.01.2014 19:40, Howard Page-Clark wrote:
On 08/01/2014 18:16, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Today I found this type definition in some FreePascal sources:
TypeReal =type Double;
I wondered what the second “type” keyword means here (I have never seen
this before).
You are being rather
On 08.01.2014 19:16, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Today I found this type definition in some FreePascal sources:
TypeReal =type Double;
I wondered what the second “type” keyword means here (I have never seen
this before).
So I looked at
On 08/01/2014 20:01, Sven Barth wrote:
On 08.01.2014 19:40, Howard Page-Clark wrote:
On 08/01/2014 18:16, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Today I found this type definition in some FreePascal sources:
TypeReal =type Double;
I wondered what the second “type” keyword means here (I have never seen
On Wed, 8 Jan 2014, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Today I found this type definition in some FreePascal sources:
TypeReal =type Double;
I wondered what the second “type” keyword means here (I have never seen this
before).
So I looked at
On Wed, 8 Jan 2014, Howard Page-Clark wrote:
On 08/01/2014 20:01, Sven Barth wrote:
On 08.01.2014 19:40, Howard Page-Clark wrote:
On 08/01/2014 18:16, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Today I found this type definition in some FreePascal sources:
TypeReal =type Double;
I wondered what the
Am 08.01.2014 21:01, schrieb Sven Barth:
No, an alias would be
=== code begin ===
type
Real = Double;
=== code end ===
Using the type behind the = tells the compiler to declare a new
type based on the right side.
So a Double and a Real are not assignment compatible and can have
On Wed, 8 Jan 2014, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Am 08.01.2014 21:01, schrieb Sven Barth:
No, an alias would be
=== code begin ===
type
Real = Double;
=== code end ===
Using the type behind the = tells the compiler to declare a new type
based on the right side.
So a Double and a Real are not
Am 08.01.2014 22:11 schrieb Jürgen Hestermann juergen.hesterm...@gmx.de:
But why is it not part of the documentation?
We are all just human beings that make mistakes. Nobody is perfect and so
is the documentation.
If nobody takes care of the documentation anymore
then it should better be
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 09:01:34PM +0100, Sven Barth wrote:
On 08.01.2014 19:40, Howard Page-Clark wrote:
On 08/01/2014 18:16, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Today I found this type definition in some FreePascal sources:
TypeReal =type Double;
I wondered what the second “type” keyword means here
On 09 Jan 2014, at 00:17, joha...@nacs.net wrote:
Is there any way to get support in Free Pascal for the old six byte REAL type
that was provided by the old Borland DOS Turbo Pascal compilers?
The only support we have is a routine to convert a TP-style real to double:
On 09.01.2014 07:22, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Where can I find the documentation for my original question about
the double TYPE keyword?
This link explains it a bit:
http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/XE5/en/Type_Compatibility_and_Identity
But that's not part of the Free Pascal
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Am 2014-01-08 21:12, schrieb Sven Barth:
I don’t know whether the first 'type' is the standard type definition
entry keyword but if so it should be typed in bold font.
No, it's not the keyword, it's a reference to the syntax diagram named
type
Am 08.01.2014 22:01, schrieb Michael Van Canneyt:
You can preview the result at
http://www.freepascal.org/~michael/ref/refch3.html
You might additionally mention that these type aliases also allow
different operator and (AFAIK also) function overloads.
Regards,
Sven
27 matches
Mail list logo
