A Free Pascal Installer that's easier? For Newbies?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

A Free Pascal Installer that's easier? For Newbies?

Jason P Sage
OK - I can see that. But, I personally am busy all the time, coding,
clients, life etc. I have released things here and there. I'm working on
something that I hope will eventually take a life on of its own - that is
TOTALLY FREEPASCAL.

I think Free Pascal is just the best language going - syntactically,
platform support, etc.

I'm also the first to agree its missing things.

My personal approach to Free Pascal concerning things that are missing, is
to write something for it, or make a wrapper for a core unit supplied with
it.

Like the MySql4 unit. That is a ton of work translating headers... some one
did it! Woo Hoo! (THANK YOU!) I can not and will not complain about there
not being an Microsoft ADO-Like" call to connect and another to toss out and
yet another to loop through them. How about that supplied ODBC unit? Do you
know just how much work went into making that useable at all?

I'm planning on writing a wrapper for the MySql4 unit (eventually maybe ODBC
too) like I did with the version MySql3 version. Works great! I leveraged
what was supplied, to take it somewhere I wanted to go.

So I suppose my point is - that perhaps you, or someone else can take your
first Free Pascal experience and build a wonderful graphical GUI installer,
for all the POSIX platforms (thinking you mentioned Linux) that any new
comer can appreciate.

Before you do however, you might take a look at what Redhat has done. I use
Fedora Redhat Linux 5. In their RPM package handler, it has Free Pascal, as
an option in the Developer Section, you can install. You click the CHECK
BOX, and it goes and looks for the latest version (I think it does anyway)
and grabs it and installs it for you.

I've done the install both ways. Once I forgot what I selected, and I think
I installed FPC to both locations! Wow - how do you undo that? Oops! And I'm
an... ahem... expert :)

Have a great Day people!

Jason P Sage




-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
[hidden email]
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 8:44 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: fpc-pascal Digest, Vol 23, Issue 33

Send fpc-pascal mailing list submissions to
        [hidden email]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        [hidden email]

You can reach the person managing the list at
        [hidden email]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of fpc-pascal digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re:  Common OpenMP syntax? (Vinzent H?fler)
   2. Re:  Common OpenMP syntax? (Vinzent H?fler)
   3. Re:  Common OpenMP syntax? (Marco van de Voort)
   4. Re:  Common OpenMP syntax? (Vinzent H?fler)
   5. Re:  Nano-x (Carsten Bager)
   6. Re:  Common OpenMP syntax? (Steve Williams)
   7. Re:  Nano-x (Marco van de Voort)
   8. Re:  Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc. (Alexandre Leclerc)
   9. Re:  Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc. (Rainer Stratmann)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:16:15 +0200
From: Vinzent H?fler <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
To: FPC-Pascal users discussions <[hidden email]>
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

John Coppens wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:11:49 +0200
> Vinzent Höfler <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Alan Burns? That's a name which rings a bell. You could have send the
>> URL, though. ;)
>>
>> http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~burns/pf.html
>>
>> Hmm, and taking a peek look at the examples, it doesn't really surprise
>> me, that this just looks like the Pascal version of Ada's tasking.
>
> Hi Vinzent.
>
> Yes - quite famous.
>
> But apart from the ADA style resources, it also implement a number of
> other tools, such as channels/remote invocation, etc.

Yes, he borrowed from quite some concurrent languages (the semaphore
could be Modula, and the channels maybe occam, I'm not sure). It still
looks very much like Ada to me, especially the remote invocation just
looks like Ada's rendezvous. Well, he calls it process, not task - just
like in VHDL - but apart from that it looks very similar.

 > The cobegin/coend
> pair to specify concurrency is elegant, though maybe somewhat 'flat'.

What do you mean by 'flat'? That it can't be nested? If I read the
OpenMP specs correctly, they say there, that they don't expect vendors
to implement nested stuff real soon anyway. :)

Yet, I don't see a compelling reason - apart from the question how to
implement it - why a nice new syntax couldn't nest "cobegin"s just like
we already do with "begin"s:

cobegin
    Do_This;
    Do_That;

    cobegin
      Do_More;
      Do_Much_More;
    coend;
coend;

Not sure of that would work. ;)

Well, I guess, I have to read the specs more thoroughly, perhaps I come
up with an idea, how all this stuff can be mapped nicely to this ugly C
hack. They even state, that they are so much more special an better
compared with all the existing concurrent languages, that I'd like to
prove them otherwise. ;)


Vinzent.



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:18:23 +0200
From: Vinzent H?fler <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
To: FPC-Pascal users discussions <[hidden email]>
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Marco van de Voort wrote:
>>> new keywords.
>> Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler directives.
>
> Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown
compiler directives. So
> you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6)

Does Delphi support FPC style macros? In that case, perhaps as sort of
include file to map "cobegin" or whatever to normal ones ...

> And then I prefer the clean syntax.

Yes, absolutely.


Vinzent.



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:31:41 +0200 (CEST)
From: [hidden email] (Marco van de Voort)
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
To: FPC-Pascal users discussions <[hidden email]>
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

> Marco van de Voort wrote:
> >>> new keywords.
> >> Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler
directives.
> >
> > Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown
compiler directives. So
> > you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6)
>
> Does Delphi support FPC style macros? In that case, perhaps as sort of
> include file to map "cobegin" or whatever to normal ones ...

No. There is not much that can be done about this. Except postprocessing FPC
source and stripping out paralel syntax. Be it directives or keywords.

 


------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:36:19 +0200
From: Vinzent H?fler <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
To: FPC-Pascal users discussions <[hidden email]>
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Marco van de Voort wrote:
>> Marco van de Voort wrote:
>>>>> new keywords.
>>>> Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler
directives.
>>> Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown
compiler directives. So
>>> you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6)
>> Does Delphi support FPC style macros? In that case, perhaps as sort of
>> include file to map "cobegin" or whatever to normal ones ...
>
> No. There is not much that can be done about this. Except postprocessing
FPC
> source and stripping out paralel syntax. Be it directives or keywords.

In that case directives don't make any sense like they'd do in a C-version.

So it'll have to be syntax. :)


Vinzent.


------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:48:26 +0200
From: "Carsten Bager" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Nano-x
To: FPC-Pascal users discussions <[hidden email]>
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

> Patch cprt0.as for your libc.

The libc that my platform is using is micro libc, and unfortunately the
micro
libc is
initialized the same way as libc.
Does anyone have a hint?
 
Carsten





------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 20:52:32 +1000
From: Steve Williams <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?
To: FPC-Pascal users discussions <[hidden email]>
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Vinzent Höfler wrote:
> Marco van de Voort wrote:
>  
>>> Marco van de Voort wrote:
>>>      
>>>>>> new keywords.
>>>>>>            
>>>>> Other compilers will give you warnings about illegal compiler
directives.
>>>>>          
>>>> Bad assumption, the only one that matters, Delphi errors on unknown
compiler directives. So
>>>> you will have to ifdef anyway. (tested D6)
>>>>        
>>> Does Delphi support FPC style macros? In that case, perhaps as sort of
>>> include file to map "cobegin" or whatever to normal ones ...
>>>      
>> No. There is not much that can be done about this. Except postprocessing
FPC
>> source and stripping out paralel syntax. Be it directives or keywords.
>>    
>
> In that case directives don't make any sense like they'd do in a
C-version.
>
> So it'll have to be syntax. :)
>  

Ok.  Beaten.  :)

But at least it provoked discussion on it.

--
Sly



This message and its attachments may contain legally privileged or
confidential information. This message is intended for the use of the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the addressee
indicated in this message, or the employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, you may not copy or
deliver this message or its attachments to anyone. Rather, you should
permanently delete this message and its attachments and kindly notify the
sender by reply e-mail. Any content of this message and its attachments,
which does not relate to the official business of the sending company must
be taken not to have been sent or endorsed by the sending company or any of
its related entities. No warranty is made that the e-mail or attachment(s)
are free from computer virus or other defect.


------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:37:45 +0200 (CEST)
From: [hidden email] (Marco van de Voort)
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Nano-x
To: [hidden email], FPC-Pascal users discussions
        <[hidden email]>
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

> > Patch cprt0.as for your libc.
>
> The libc that my platform is using is micro libc, and unfortunately the
micro
> libc is
> initialized the same way as libc.
> Does anyone have a hint?

objdump a helloworld C program, and investigate.


------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 08:19:01 -0400
From: "Alexandre Leclerc" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
To: "FPC-Pascal users discussions" <[hidden email]>
Message-ID:
        <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

2006/7/20, Florian Klaempfl <[hidden email]>:

> Tomas Hajny wrote:
> > On 20 Jul 06, at 22:41, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
> >> Rainer Stratmann wrote:
> >>> Am Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2006 13:44 schrieb Jason P Sage:
> >  .
> >  .
> >>> In my view these "simple things" must have highest priority.
> >>>
> >>> In the Linux installation routine there is an install-question
> >>> something like "do you want to install /usr/ or /usr/local/"
> >> The default is fine?
> >>
> >>> A beginner can not know what this is good for. Also there is no
information if
> >>> the install routine on Linux must have root rights...
> >> Well, because it depends on were you install? People not installing as
> >> root should know how to change /usr/local to something appropriate.
> >>
> >>> So if a beginner does not get work these "simple things" he give up
very fast.
> >> People don't dig into such stuff will be never good programmers, so I
> >> see no real problem if they give up :) Programming is full of such
> >> challenges.
> >
> > ;-) What would you think about distribution of
> > Win32 version with install.bat script asking you
>
> Since linux people didn't get it to make a common gui, a gui installer
> isn't doable.

There is autopackage.org which is a very nice piece of work... but al
c/c++ centric.

--
Alexandre Leclerc


------------------------------

Message: 9
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 14:54:15 +0200
From: Rainer Stratmann <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Pascal Compiler - Missing Messages etc.
To: FPC-Pascal users discussions <[hidden email]>
Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"

Am Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2006 22:41 schrieb Florian Klaempfl:

> Rainer Stratmann wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 20. Juli 2006 13:44 schrieb Jason P Sage:
> >> I know most of you know this stuff and it's a no brainer - but - I just
> >> wanted to say this because I see people having problems sometimes
> >> getting started and sometimes its easier to go around the ditch than to
> >> build a bridge!
> >
> > It is a reason, why fp don't come closer to the "critical mass".
>
> Which critical mass?

Pascal is an ideal, maybe the best programming language.
Do you want that more people use it?
I saw pictures about a booth whith the maintainers of fpc at a linux-fair.
It would be better if you can say to the ones who are interested that fpc is
a
language whith a userfriendly environment. I am sure in this case more
people
would use it.

> > In my view these "simple things" must have highest priority.
> >
> > In the Linux installation routine there is an install-question
> > something like "do you want to install /usr/ or /usr/local/"
>
> The default is fine?

...maybe for the linux expert...
...many people want to swith from another os, so they are not familiar with
linux...
...when I type /usr/local then error messages come, so this irritates then
and
is a reason why not use it or why to say it is not good enough...

> > A beginner can not know what this is good for. Also there is no
> > information if the install routine on Linux must have root rights...
>
> Well, because it depends on were you install? People not installing as
> root should know how to change /usr/local to something appropriate.

Sorry I don't know this at the moment of installing, like you don't know at
this moment how to make userfriendly installers ;)

> > So if a beginner does not get work these "simple things" he give up very
> > fast.
>
> People don't dig into such stuff will be never good programmers, so I
> see no real problem if they give up :) Programming is full of such
> challenges.

Partly I agree, but, what has a good programmer to do with internals of any
os? That a programmer should be an intelligent person does not mean that it
could not be an advantage if fpc run "out of the box".

It would be shining a better light on fpc then.

If the installing step is easy then many people can use their source code
they
wrote for dos for example.

Ok, there are then many challenges to do, but "hello world" runs already
then
and it is very easier to build up on "hello world" then got nothing to work.

> Tomas Hajny wrote:

> > ;-) What would you think about distribution of
> > Win32 version with install.bat script asking you
> > to choose whether you want to put cygwin1.dll in
> > system32 or your new bin directory?
>
>So all you're asking for is a "If you don't know the answer, just press
><ENTER>"? Isn't that the default already? ;)
It woul be an advantage, if there is a short description why to type what.
...at the moment the user can ask the same question if it is the default
already...? ;)
When there is a description the user is more sure about the installation.
>
>Vinzent.
Rainer


------------------------------

_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

End of fpc-pascal Digest, Vol 23, Issue 33
******************************************



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.3/394 - Release Date: 7/20/2006


_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist  -  [hidden email]
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal