gpc-20030323 testsuite with alignment

Adriaan van Os gpc at
Tue Mar 25 20:14:09 CET 2003

Frank Heckenbach wrote:

> Adriaan van Os wrote:
>> I ran the gpc testsuite, with the added option
>> EXTRA_TEST_PFLAGS="--maximum-field-alignment=8".
> Interesting idea, but you can't actually expect it to work. The
> option affects all structures, including those used in the RTS and
> defined in gpc.pas or built-in. This includes the internal file
> structure which seems to be responsible for most of the failures.
> I expected the option to be used for specific declarations (system
> interfaces etc.). Of course, this means that the command-line option
> is not really a good idea (for now).
> To solve this, we could deactivate the option while defining the
> bulit-in structures (in the compiler), and while compiling gpc.pas
> (by putting a `0' compiler directive in it -- you might want to try
> this, this might fix some of the failures, but probably not msot of
> them since the file structure is built-in).
> Still, there will be problems if (a) some regular unit is compiled
> with this option and its users not or vice versa, (b) some
> ("non-system") C interface unit is compiled with it, (c) code that
> relies on specific alignment is compiled with it. This might not be
> too many problems, but might still be some failures when running the
> test suite with `--maximum-field-alignment=8'.
> Still I wonder if the command-line option is actually useful, and if
> we shouldn't drop it and only allow it as a compiler directive.

Running the testsuite with EXTRA_TEST_PFLAGS="--pack-struct" causes 
similar problems .... Dropping both --maximum-field-alignment and 
--pack-struct as command-line options is a solution (and I don't object 
if they are dropped) but my personal preference is in keeping them and 
adding compiler directives to compiler-internal and runtime-library 
data structures.


Adriaan van Os

More information about the Gpc mailing list