Re: Is GPC dead?
"John L. Ries" <[email protected]> Wed, 28 Dec 2016 21:56:46 -0800 (PST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.compilers.gpc |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <alpine.DEB.2.11.1612282152410.60738@apolloIII> |
That's pretty much what I was looking for on the subject of "how to get GPC to compile with a given version of GCC". Thanks. --------------------------| John L. Ries | Salford Systems | Phone: (619)543-8880 x107 | or (435)867-8885 | --------------------------| On Thu, 29 Dec 2016, Waldek Hebisch wrote: > John L. Ries wrote: > > > > It would be nice if we could find something on the website more recent > > than 2005 (perhaps a changelog and links to the current codebase); maybe > > some instructions on how to get GPC to compile with GCC 5 and 6, or at > > least a sense of how one would go about creating the necessary patches to > > the latter. > > I a sense porting process is simple (or you may call it primitive): > first put gpc files into gcc tree and try to apply as much of patches > to older gcc as applies. Then try to compile, this will produce > tons of errors. Form the errors see what changed in gcc and adapt > gpc to the change. In current gpc source there are a conditionals > which choose version of gpc code apropriate for given gcc version, > but during porting one can work with single version and add > conditionals later. After sevaral iterations one should obtain > compilable version. Then run testsuite and fix regressions. > > Finding out what exactly needs to be changed is important part > of the work. For example when some gcc function used by gpc > is missing one needs to find out how to handle this. Sometimes > function is no longer needed and one may simply delete the call. > Sometimes there is a rename and one has to use new name. Sometimes > there is a deeper change. To know what to do it is helpful to > look at gcc change logs and at parts of C compiler parallel to > Pascal compiler. > > > Personally, I would be overjoyed if I had some time to contribute to GPC > > development, but I work too many hours at my regular job to consider it at > > the present time; but perhaps there are some small things that some of us > > could do to move things along at the rate of an hour or two a week per > > person. > > Concerning adapting to newer gcc: this is probably about one man-month > per gcc version. It is poorly decomposable problem: there are interactions > with earlier step and it is important to use facts established in > earlier steps in subsequent steps. If you make long break you > are likely to forget things and re-do discovery work. > Actually, discovery work for single problem is likely to take > more than two hours, so if you literally mean two hours per > week (as opposed to say a weeked per quater) than you will have > trouble making any progress. Also given that new versions > appear yearly at slow speed you will end up with port to newer, > but still obsolete gcc version. > > -- > Waldek Hebisch > > _______________________________________________ > Gpc mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.g-n-u.de/mailman/listinfo/gpc _______________________________________________ Gpc mailing list [email protected] https://www.g-n-u.de/mailman/listinfo/gpc