Re: Extended Pascal

Bastiaan Veelo <[email protected]> Thu, 5 Jan 2017 14:41:22 +0100

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

> On 5 Jan 2017, at 14:32, Waldek Hebisch <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> : The Extended Pascal features still missing from GPC
> : are set types with variable bounds and discriminated ordinal schema as
> : schema discriminants.

Thanks for the update.

> 
>> 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
> 
> I understand decision to not use gpc.  Simply in the
> past I looked at list of features of Prospero Pascal
> and there were missing Extended Pascal features.

That I was unaware of.

> So I was curious which feature decided that gpc
> support was "limited" and Prospero presumably
> "not limited”.

Pardon the negative wording there, it was unintended.

Bastiaan.

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

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