Re: Pascal program file parameter to Ada translation (Was: Re: Is GPC

Bastiaan Veelo <[email protected]> Thu, 5 Jan 2017 09:36:46 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.comp.compilers.gpc
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

> On 5 Jan 2017, at 02:21, Waldek Hebisch <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
>> 
>> have vanished from the Internet. We have previously considered gpc, but =
>> its limited support for Extended Pascal has stopped us.
> 
> Out of curiosity: what was the deal breaking feature?

Hi Waldek,

It was about a decade ago, and I don’t remember the details of the problems. If I look at the missing bits now: "The Extended Pascal features still missing from GPC are qualified module import, protected module export variables, set types with variable bounds, structured value initializers and expressions as subrange lower bounds” [1], I don’t see any deficiencies that couldn’t be worked around. According to my own notes [2] it may have been this, but also the use of some non-standard Prospero extensions or API (OO? Memory mapped files? w32 GUI support? Serial bus? Printing? Plotting?). Back then the objective was not to replace Prospero but to find a way to mix languages, and gpc+gcc made it possible to link object files into the same executable. Before trying to make our massive code base compatible with gpc, I looked for a different way to do that. When I found one that allowed us to continue to use Prospero, which had served us well over many years, I stopped using gpc.

Best regards,
Bastiaan.

[1] http://www.gnu-pascal.de/gpc/Welcome.html#Welcome <http://www.gnu-pascal.de/gpc/Welcome.html#Welcome>
[2] http://data.hiper-conf.info/compit2011_berlin.pdf <http://data.hiper-conf.info/compit2011_berlin.pdf> page 361

_______________________________________________
Gpc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.g-n-u.de/mailman/listinfo/gpc

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 842 B)