Standard Compatibility [was: Re: New Alpha]_(re)

Fri, 4 Apr 1997 08:31:51 +0200 (MET DST)

> Phil Nelson wrote:
> > 
> > >So, obviously, gpc needs to support both ways.
> > Yes, I agree.  When the --borland_pascal switch is set, it should look
> > like Borland Pascal!
> 
> Hi Phil and the Rest of the world ...
> 
> Although gpc ain't a commercial product it should be build on wide 
> acceptance.
> (Where else shall all the really good gpc-programs come from?)
> In past nobody was interested in any pascal-standards but Borland.
> Borland-Pascal IMHO is the standard-pascal anyway.
> The probably are hundreds of Borland-Pascal-Users on one or two
> other-semi-standard-pascal-with-some-extensions-users.

I agree.

[...]

> gpc really shall default to borland/turbo-pascal behaviour. You could
> implement reading ~/.gpcrc to change that. (For ease this could be done
> with a shell script) The cause ain't 'standard' performance, as
> thousands
> of dos-pascal-programs will be ported to linux. However, this may be a
> little bit visionary. But we should NOT artificially complicate changes 
> to gnu pascal. (Vice versa case is an interesting question to discuss
> too.)

Hi!

I don't like the idea of a local (user) configuration file as GPC.CFG or
.gpcrc. There is a way of doing it in a makefile. If someone _needs_ a compiler
which is a borland like compiler for standard, might there be a compile-time
switch? Let's consider something like 
./configure --try-to-be-a-borland-compiler or 
./configure --use-standard-pascal.

Tsch"u"s, Nils


-- 
Nils Bokermann      
Johanneswerkstr. 90        Phone: +49 521 891279
33613 Bielefeld            FAX:   +49 521 550116
Germany			   "Wir wollen die Natur nicht erhalten --
			   Wir wollen nur ihre Dynamik nicht st"oren."
_______________________________________________________________________________

Nils Bokermann (nilsb@reality.owl.de)